K.B.N.SINGH, VENUGOPAL
T. S. Cycles of India, Ambattur, Madras – Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Another – Respondent
VENUGOPAL J
The appellant-writ petitioner is a manufacturer of cycles. Item 35 in the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) reads as follows-
"T.I. 35 Cycles, Parts of cycles other than Motor Cycles, namely
(i) Free wheels ... Rs. 2 each
(ii) Rims ... Rs. 4 each.'
2.By Finance Act, 1975, Item 68 was introduced in the First Schedule to the Act with effect from 1-3-1975 and it reads as follows :" *
T.I. 68 All other goods, not elsewhere specified.
All other goods, pot elsewhere specified, manufactured in a factory but excluding -
(a) 1% ad valorem.
"3.By Finance Act of 1976, while retaining Item 68, the word 'cycles' in item 35 was deleted and it was as under :" *
T.I. 35 Cycle parts
Parts of cycles other than motor cycle, namely-
(i) Free wheels ... Rs. 2 each
(ii) Rims ... Rs. 4 each.'
Till the introduction of item 68 on 1-3-1975, there was no levy of excise duty on cycles cleared from the factory in fully assembled condition, or cycles cleared in unassembled condition known to the trade as 'completely' knocked down condition (hereinafter to be referred as CKD condition). After the introduction of the residuary item 68,
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.