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

S.VENKATESAN, S.DUGGAL, K.L.REKHI
Mahindra Engineering and Chemical Products Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Pune – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J. Banerjee,K.D. Tayal

ORDER

K.L. Rekhi, Member (T)

1. The point of dispute involved in this appeal is whether tubular shaped are chamber housings manufactured by the appellants from glass fabrics, which they purchase from outside, fall under Tariff Item 22F(4) or under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. These two Tariff Items read as under :-

"22. F. Mineral fibres and yarn and manufactures therefrom, in or in relation to the manufacture of which any process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of power, the following, namely :

(1) Glass fibres and yarn including glass tissues and glass wool;

(2) Asbestos fibre and yarn;

(3) any other mineral fibre or yarn, whether continuous or otherwise, such as, slag wool and rock wool;

(4) Other manufactures in which mineral fibres or yarn or both predominate or predominates in weight.

Explanation.-This Item does not include asbestos cement products." "68. All other goods, not elsewhere specified, excluding-

2. Initially, the subject housings were classified by the Department under Item 68. On 5-12-80, the Assistant Collector issued a notice calling upon the appellants to show cause as to why the classification should not be changed to Item 22F(4). The ground given for t

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