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

K.L.REKHI, HARISH CHANDER, K.PRAKASH ANAND
Collector of Central Excise – Appellant
Versus
Hiper – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.N. Nigam,R.K. Habbu

ORDER

Harish Chander, Member (J)

1. Collector of Central Excise, Pune, has filed an appeal being aggrieved from order-in-appeal No. M-1437/PN-96/84, dated 25.6.1984 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.

2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the respondent is manufacturer of filters and filter elements falling under Tariff Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. In addition, the respondent is also carrying on job work. The respondent was availing of the benefit of notification No.105/80 dated 19th June, 1980 for the year 1981-82 on the ground that value of the clearances during the preceding financial year i.e. 1st April, 1980 to 31st March, 1981 were well below the limit of Rs. 30,00,000/- (rupees thirty lacs). The Superintendent of Central Excise, Pune Range I, Pune IV Division, observed that if the cost of raw material is added to job work charges charged by M/s. Hiper, from the customers and if this is added to the value of clearances of Tariff Item 68 goods manufactured and cleared by the party, the value of total clearances exceeded Rs. 30,00,000/- during the period from 1st April,1980 to 31st March, 1981. The Range Superintendent issued the following sho

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