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

H.R.SYIEM, HARISH CHANDER, P.C.JAIN
Steel Authority of India Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N. Mookherjee,A.K. Rajhans

ORDER

Harish Chander, Member (J)

1. The point to be decided in the present appeal is whether the fabricated steel structures weighing 26533.179 MT falling under Tariff Item 68 valued at Rs. 9,48,58,000.91 from the raw materials like channels, angles, H.R. Sheets, C.R. Sheets, M.S. Plates, Rounds etc. to different manufacturers after obtaining due permission under Rule 56C and received back the finished goods like fabricated steel structures classifiable under Tariff Item 68 from such secondary-manufacturers under Rule 56C are liable to Central Excise duty or not. A show cause notice was issued to the appellants for alleged contravention of Rule 56C read with Rules 9, 173F and 173G for removal of 26,533.179 MT of fabricated steel structures falling under Tariff Item 68 received from different secondary manufacturers without payment of excise duty amounting to Rs. 75,88,680.23 during the month of January, 1983. It was also pointed out in the show cause notice that why the demand issued under D.D.2 No. 3258, dated 26-7-83 should not be confirmed and that the penalty should not be imposed on them under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. In response to the same the appellants st

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