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

1996 Supreme(SC) 2129

SUHAS C.SEN, S.P.BHARUCHA
Collector Of Central Excise, Bombay – Appellant
Versus
Kores India LTD. , Thane – Respondent


JUDGMENT

S.P. BHARUCHA, J.

(1) THE Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate tribunal took the view that stencil skin was classifiable under the residuary Tariff Item 68 for the purposes of excise duty and not under Item 17(2 which covers paper and paper board, all sorts, including coated paper. In so doing the tribunal relied upon a Tariff Advice issued by the central Board of Excise and Customs on 20/11/1978. The Tariff Advice stated that the levy of duty on coated paper for making stencil paper had been under examination and it had been decided that coated paper was an intermediate product which did not come into the market either to be bought or sold. It was used in the manufacture of stencils and should be considered not excisable.

(2) THERE is a Trade Notice dated 1/3/1976, cited by the learned counsel for the respondent, that expressly deals with stencil paper; it states that stencil paper should be treated as an article of stationery and, therefore, outside the purview of Item 17.

(3) THE learned Additional Solicitor General, on behalf of the Revenue, has drawn our attention to the judgment of this court in CCE v. Krishna Carbon Paper Co. where it was



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