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

1990 Supreme(Mad) 303

KANAKARAJ
Madura Coats Limited – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Collector of Central Excise – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:S. Govind Swaminathan, N. Jothi, Advocates.

Judgment :-

This writ petition is for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the first respondent made in C.No. V/15A/3/65/79 dated 20-5-1981. Though the petitioner has narrated the sequence of events from 1977 onwards, I am of the opinion that it is sufficient to set out the facts from 6-10-1979, the date of the show-cause notice issued in C.No. V/15A/3/65/77. In and by the said show-cause notice, the first respondent has called upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the petitioner-company should not take out a licence under Rule 174 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for the manufacture of resin master falling under Tariff Item 15A and get a Classification list/Price list approved before effecting further clearance. In the show-cause notice, it is stated that the petitioner-company have been manufacturing resin master classifiable under Tariff Item 15A (i) of Central Excise Tariff Schedule and have been using the same in the manufacture of dipping solution falling under Tariff Item 68 and clearing both for captive consumption within the Mills without getting a proper licence and without filing a classification and price lists as required under Rule 174 read w














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