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

S.D.JHA, I.J.RAO, K.PRAKASH ANAND
Hyderabad Race Club – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M. Chandrasekharan,H.L. Verma

ORDER

S.D. Jha, Member (J)

1. The questions arising for decision in this Appeal by M/s. Hyderabad Race Club, Hyderabad, against order dated 31-12-81 passed by Central Board of Excise and Customs are whether the Totaliser system installed by the appellants in their premises at Hyderabad is liable to central excise duty, if so, its quantum and the period for which it should be made and the legality of show cause notice dated 3-1-1978 which has led to the present demand.

It might be stated that Item No. 9 of Notification No. 51/70-C.E. dated 1-3-1970, as amended by subsequent notifications, specifies Totalisers as one of the office machines and apparatus liable to duty under Tariff Item 33-D of Central Excise Tariff. During arguments it was felt that the Item specifies Totalisers and not Totalizators or Totalizator system and that three might be different. On this doubt being expressed by the Bench, Shri M. Chandrasekharan, learned Counsel for the appellants, stated that this was not one of the grounds he urged against the impugned order. We, therefore, do not examine this question.

3. The present demand is the outcome of visit dated 21-7-77 by the Superintendent (Prev.) to the appellants

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