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

HARISH CHANDER, JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, V.RAJAMANICKAM
W. H. Brady and Co. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.G. Gokhale, R.C. Pande,K.D. Tayal

ORDER

Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)

1. Both appeals involve common issues and are hence heard together and being disposed of by a common order.

2. The charge against the appellants is that M/s. Brady Morris Engineering Co. (hereinafter referred to as the subsidiary Co.) had manufactured and removed excisable goods i.e. pulley blocks, electric hoists and travelling trolleys falling under T.I. 68 valued at Rs. 1,69,429/- from their factory premises by truck No. BMS 2251 belonging to W.H. Brady Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the holding Co.) on 12th and 13th October 1981 without determination and payment of Central Excise duty, without the cover or valid CE transport documents in form G.P. 1 and without accountal in the R.G. 1 Register. After issue of show cause notices for levy of duty on spare parts supplied, on repair charges and erection and assembling charges, seizure of confiscated goods, imposition of penalty and confiscation of the truck, the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay passed the impugned order dated 21-7-1984,

(a) levying duty of Rs. 59,262.11 by inclusion of value of spare parts and erection charges in the assessable value

(b) releasing seized goods on payment

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