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

1993 Supreme(Cal) 287

RUMA PAL
ASSOCIATED PIGMENTS LTD – Appellant
Versus
SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
PARTHA BANERJI, PRANTOSH MUKHERJI, S.K.BAGARIA

RUMA PAL, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner company manufactures Lead Oxide Grey. The dispute in this case is whether Lead Oxide is classifiable under sub-heading No. 2804. 60 as per the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 as Lead Oxide, Red Lead and Orange Lead or whether it is classifiable under sub-heading No. 3823. 00 as follows :-"prepared binders for foundry moulds or cores; chemical products and preparations of the chemical or allied industries (including those consisting of mixtures of natural products), not elsewhere specified or included; residual products of the chemical or allied industries, not elsewhere specified or included. ".

( 2 ) WITH effect from 28th February, 1986 Tariff Items under sub-heading No. 2804. 60 were introduced as separate items which read as follows :-"lead Oxide, Read Lead and Orange Lead -10%"

( 3 ) SUBSEQUENT to such introduction the petitioners paid Excise duty on the products manufactured by it under protest on the basis that the products manufactured by it were classifiable under sub-heading No. 2804. 60 and not under the residual item of Tariff.

( 4 ) ON 19th March, 1986 the Excise authorities drew samples from the petitioners' product Lead Oxide Grey.
















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