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

B.B.GUJRAL, A.J.F.D’SOUZA, S.D.JHA
Jay Electric Wire Corporation Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Mysore – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Gopal Prasad,K.V. Kunhikrishnan

ORDER

A.J.F. D'Souza, Member (T)

1. The revision application dated 1st September, 1981, under Section 36 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, against Order-in-Appeal passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Madras, has been transferred to the Tribunal by the Government of India for disposal as an Appeal in terms of Section 35P(2) of the said Act.

2. The appellants import tungsten wire and molybdenum wire of a higher micron size and draw them to finer sizes, which are supplied as such, as also transferred to their own coiling plant, for being converted into filaments. While drawing the wire, it breaks into pieces which are collected periodically and disposed of as scrap. The appellants say that by a mistake of law they filed a classification list dated 6th September, 1979, classifying these broken pieces as a commodity falling under T.I. 68, CET. On 12th November, 1979, a refund claim was filed as the duty paid from 22-12-1977 to 18-7-1979 was not warranted under law. The Assistant Collector, by his order dated 19-8-1980, held that scrap is necessarily something detached and the conclusion is that it should retain all the characteristics of the original pr

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