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

1980 Supreme(Bom) 176

D.P.MADAN, P.S.SHAH
D. R. Kohli, Collector of Central Excise, Bombay & others – Appellant
Versus
Associated Films Industries Pvt. Ltd. , Tardeo – Respondent


JUDGMENT - Per P.S. SHAH, J.:---This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated January 29, 1975. passed by Bhatt, J. allowing the respondents petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. The facts which are not in dispute are these :

The respondent No. 2, is the Director and a Shareholder of the respondent No. 1 Company, which owns and runs a Division knowns as Film Centre and inter alia carries on the business of printing and processing cinematograph films. The Company has been paying excise duty on such cinematograph films under item No. 37 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. Prior to April 1, 1969, item No. 37 in the First Schedule to the said Act read as under.

CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS EXPOSED

Tariff Item Description of Goods Rate of Duty

No. Basic Special Excise.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

37 Cinematograph Films Exposed of a width below 30 mm.

of 30 mm. in width

or higher.

-------------------------------------------------------

(1) Newsreels and shorts not 15 paise 10 paise 20 of the basic

exceeding 500

































































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