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

M.GOURI SHANKAR MURTHY, H.R.SYIEM, A.J.F.D’SOUZA
Golden Paper Udyog (P. ) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Delhi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N. Khaitan, Nandita Chandra,A.K. Jain

ORDER

M. Gouri Shankar Murthy, Member (J)

1. The two questions that had been raised for decision in the instant Revision application transferred to the Tribunal and heard as an Appeal pursuant to the provisions in Sec. 35(P) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), are-

(a) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the process of bituminising duty paid kraft paper by bonding with duty paid bitumen, amounts to "manufacture" or involves "any process incidental to or ancillary to the completion of manufacture" in terms of the definition of "manufacture" in the Act,

(b) If it does, is duty paid kraft paper on bonding with duty paid bitumen, assessable to duty again in terms of Item 17(2) of the First Schedule to the Act (hereinafter referred to as the Schedule), or the residuary Item 68 thereof.

2. The facts necessary to appreciate and determine the aforesaid questions are,-

(a) the Appellant buys duty paid kraft paper ;

(b) the layers of such kraft paper are bonded with bitumen (duty paid) as the bonding agent or adhesive ;

(c) for the period between 1-9-1977 to 31-1-1978, the Appellant was paying Excise duty assessable under Item 17(2) of the

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