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

2008 Supreme(SC) 1330

V.S.SIRPURKAR, ASHOK BHAN
Camlin Limited – Appellant
Versus
Commnr. of Central Excise, Mumbai – Respondent


Judgment

Ashok Bhan, J. —

1.These three sets of appeals arise from a common Judgment and Order dated 30th April, 2002 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Western Zonal Bench at Mumbai (for short “the Tribunal”).

2.The first set of appeals being C.A. Nos. 4507-4508 of 2002 has been filed by M/s. Camlin Limited (hereinafter referred to as “the Assessee”), whereas the remaining two sets of appeals being C.A. Nos. 1692-1693 of 2003 & C.A. No. 978 of 2005 have been filed by the Revenue.

3.The issues in these appeals are regarding the classification of the “writing inks” being manufactured and captively consumed by the assessee and consequent demand of duty thereon. The inks with their constituents are:-

No. NAME OF THE INKS INGREDIENTS

1.99-Marker Inksi) Ketonic Solvent

ii) Solvent Dyes

iii) Binders

2.100-Camel Fount Drawing Inki) Carbon Black (Pigment)

ii) Shellac Binder

iii)Water & Preservatives

3.07-Camel Waterproofi) Carbon Black (Pigment)

Drawing Ink ii) Shellac Binder

iii)Water & Preservatives

4.09-Camel Spl. Drawingi) Carbon Black (Pigment)

Ink Black ii) Shellac Binder

iii)Water & Preservatives

5.98-

































































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