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

2009 Supreme(P&H) 1304

M.M.KUMAR, JASWANT SINGH
Commissioner Of Central Excise, Panchkula – Appellant
Versus
Special Machine – Respondent


Judgment

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. This order shall dispose of C.E.A. Nos. 48 and 120 of 2005 as common questions of law and facts are involved. These appeals have been tiled by the revenue under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for brevity, #28;the Act#25;) challenging order dated 28-4-2004 [2004 (169) ELT 215 (Tri. - Del.)] and order dated 2-12-2004, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity, #24;the Tribunal) in respective cases. The facts are being referred from C.E.A. No. 48 of 2005.

2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s. Special Machiners-respondent was having three separate Units in Karnal and engaged in the manufacture of welding electrodes, plants & machinery and flux, falling under Chapters 83, 84, 85, 38 and 29 of the Schedule attached to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for brevity, #24;the Tariff Act#25;). It was also holding L4 Licences for manufacturing of said products. M/s. Industrial Products, M/s. Modern Equipments and M/s. S.M. Welding Electrodes (P) Ltd., all situated at Karnal, are also licensed/registered with the department and engaged in the manufacture of welding electrodes. M/s. Perfect Industries. Ka













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