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

B.B.GUJRAL, S.D.JHA, A.J.F.D’SOUZA
Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Pune – Appellant
Versus
Vulcan Leval Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
V. Lakshmi Kumaran,G.E. Vahanvati, M.P. Baxi

ORDER

S.D. Jha, Member (J)

1. The questions for decision in this appeal originally a Show Cause Notice under Section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 by the Government of India to the respondents are : whether carrying on certain process on duty paid seamless steel tubes by the respondent to make them into drilling rods and casing tubes constitute manufacture and whether the products so obtained fall under T.I. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff or continue to fall under T.I. 26AA ibid, and the date from which the respondents should get relief in case the Order-in-Appeal is upheld by the Tribunal.

2. Facts as found from the arguments and also from the record are that on 31-8-1977/2-9-1977, the Superintendent of Central Excise, Assessment Group 'D', Pune-2 Division communicated the decision of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise to the respondent. The Assistant Collector, Central Excise had decided that conversion of Steel Tubes into drilling rods and casing tubes would constitute manufacture under T.I. 68 and the processes of conversion would not constitute job work. It appears that the respondents represented against this decision to the Assistant Collector of Centr

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