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

S.VENKATESAN, K.L.REKHI, S.DUGGAL
Inarco Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Bombay – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.B. Engineer, J.R. Cama,K.D. Tayal

ORDER

S. Duggal, J.

1. The point falling for Determination in this appeal is scope of the benefit of Exemption Notification No. 197/67 dated 29-8-1967, as amended from time to time; particularly with reference to Sub-item (3) of the Table annexed thereto, vis-a-vis the goods manufactured by the appellants, bearing the trade name : "Aprons' and 'Cots'.

2. We consider it expedient to reproduce the said notification, as well as the relevant Tariff Entry, so as to facilitate appreciation of area of controversy.

"Notification No. 197/67-C.E. dated 29-8-1967 as amended by Notification No. 1/68-C.E. dated 6-1-1968; No. 161/70-C.E., dated 29-8-1970; No. 17/73-C.E. dated 3-2-1973 and No. 72/74-C.E. dated 13-4-1974.

EXEMPTION to piping and tubing of unhardened vulcanised rubber:-In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Govt. hereby exempts piping and tubing of unhardened vulcanised rubber, falling under Sub-item (3) of Item No. 16A and specified in column (2) of the Table below from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon :-

xxx xxx xxx

3. The aforesaid tariff item was inducted in the Central Excise Tariff (GET for short)

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