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

1981 Supreme(Mad) 5

M.M.ISMAIL, SETHURAMAN
P. M. Abdul Latif and Others – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Trichirapalli and Others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:P. Chidambaram, U.N.R. Rao, Advocates.

Judgment :-

ISMAIL, C.J

This batch of writ petitions involves the interpretation of a notification of the Government of India dated 18th June, 1977, issued in the Department of Revenue and Banking, New Delhi, bearing G.S.R. No. 176/77-C.E. The said notification reads as follows :

"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts goods falling under Item No. 68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), and cleared for home consumption on or after the. first day of April in any financial year, by or on behalf of a manufacturer from one or more factories from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon, if an officer not below the rank of an Assistant Collector of Central Excise is satisfied that the sum total of the value of the capital investment made from time to time on plant and machinery installed in the industrial unit in which the goods, under clearance, are manufactured, is not more than rupees ten lakhs :

Provided that this exemption shall not be applicable to a manufacturer if the total value of all excisable goods cleared by him or on his behalf in the









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