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

HARISH CHANDER, V.RAJAMANICKAM
Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N. Mookherjee,K.D. Tayal

ORDER

V. Rajamanickam, Member (T)

1. The Ld. Advocate for the appellants Shri N. Mookherjee stated that the appellants were manufacturers of iron and steel products particularly Castings, besides Spun Pipes from Steel Melting Scrap, Pig Iron etc. The castings were further processed for the purpose of repair/maintenance of the existing machineries in the factory of the petitioner at 'Burnpur'. Prior to the introduction of the new Tariff their goods were classified under Tariff Item-58 and were exempted. Since no provision was made under the new Tariff for exemption, representations were made and consequently Notification No. 281/86 dated 24-04-1986 was issued. The Notification exempts all excisable goods produced and used within the same factory or other factory of same manufacturer for repairs or maintenance of machinery. The Assistant Collector in his Order dated 29-07-1987 has come to the conclusion that the Notification refers to workshop within a factory and held that it connotes "a tool-room" sort of thing, where only the goods other than those which are primarily intended for manufacture by the factory as their prime production or one of principal raw-materials/inputs for capti

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