SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 1869

K.VENKATASWAMI, S.P.BHARUCHA
Appellate Collector Of Central Excise – Appellant
Versus
Wadpack Private LTD. – Respondent


(1) THE respondent was entrusted by M/s. ITC Ltd., Bangalore, with the job work of supplying corrugated boxes. For this purpose ITC supplied the required kraft paper. (These facts are taken from the Special Leave Petition itself and are not in dispute).

(2) THE respondent claimed the benefit of an Exemption Notification dated 31/1/1975 issued under Rule 8(1 of the central Excise Rules, 1944,exempting goods "manufactured in A factory as a job work from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon as is in excess of the duty calculated on the basis of the amount charged for the job work.

EXPLANATION: For the purposes of this notification, the expression job work shall mean such item of work where an article intended to undergo manufacturing process is supplied to the job worker and that article is returned by the job worker to the supplier after the article has undergone the intended manufacturing process, on charging only for the job work done by him."

(3) THE High court came to the conclusion in the writ petition that was filed by the respondent that the respondent was entitled to such exemption, and it is the order of the High court which is under chal


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top