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

G.SANKARAN, D.N.LAL, S.C.JAIN
Bhor Industries Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Bombay – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.M. Patel,A.K. Jain

ORDER

G. Sankaran, Member (T)

1. The captioned appeal was initially filed as a Revision Application before the Central Government which, under Section 35-P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, has come as transferred proceedings to this Tribunal, for disposal as if it were an appeal filed before it.

2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that M/s. Bhor Industries, Bombay (hereinafter referred to as Bhor for brevity's sake) filed a classification list No. XIV/75, dated 20-11-1975 for the product PVC films for lamination with jute and PVC films for tapes claiming that the PVC film was non-excisable on the ground it was a non-marketable intermediate product for internal use. This description was further amended to crude PVC films/sheets. The classification list was approved on 9-12-1975 by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise. Later on, on 15-2-1977, the Assistant Collector issued a show cause notice to Bhor calling upon them to show cause why the aforesaid films should not be reclassified as excisable under Item No. 15A(2) of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule and why duty should not be recovered from them thereafter as well as in respect of past clearances. The notice i

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