Alupro Building Systems Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise Bangalore-II

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(SC) 629

J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVAN
Alupro Building Systems Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise Bangalore-II – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Ms. Charanya Lakshmi Kumaran, Adv. Ms. Nitum Jain, Adv. Ms. Neha Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Devansh Garg, Adv. Mr. Swastik Mishra, Adv. Ms. Medha Sinha, Adv. Mr. R. Parthasarathy, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. N. Venkataraman, A.S.G. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. V.C. Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Prashant Singh Ii, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Mayank Pandey, Adv. Mr. Aman Jha, Adv.

JUDGMENT

J.B. PARDIWALA, J.

For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts:-

INDEX
I.	FACTUAL MATRIX
II.	IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
III.	SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT
IV.	SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
V.	ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
VI.	ANALYSIS A. Scope and ambit of expression “the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods” in sub-section (1) of Section 35G of the Act, 1944 i. Nature of amendment in sub-section (2) of Section 35L of the Act, 1944 B. Meaning, scope and application of “manufacture” under Section 2(f) of the Act, 1944 i. First Limb – No goods with distinct characteristics came into existence ii. Second Limb – Transformed goods are marketable as distinct goods a. Meaning and understanding of the term “marketable” b. Standard of proof to be met while discharging burden of proof
VII.	CONCLUSION

1. This appeal is at the instance of an assessee and is directed against the judgment and order dated 01.04.2010 passed by the High Court of Karnataka in Central Excise Appeal No. 17/2007 (hereinafter, “th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(SC) 629

J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVANAlupro Building Systems Pvt. Ltd. – AppellantVersusCommissioner of Central Excise Bangalore-II – Respondent

Cases Referred (21)

J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVAN
Alupro Building Systems Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise Bangalore-II – Respondent