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

S.VENKATESAN, S.DUGGAL, K.L.REKHI
Sri Ramdas Motor Transport Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
L.C. Mittal,K.D. Tayal

ORDER

S. Duggal, Member (J)

1. The goods which are the subject-matter of controversy in the present appeal, are described by the appellant, who is the manufacturer thereof, as "Hub-Bolts and Nuts". Prior to 1-3-1979, Tariff Item 34A of the Central Excise Tariff, as then prevailing, covered "all parts and accessories of motor vehicles not otherwise specified". However, by virtue of Notification No. 99/71-C.E., dated 29-5-1971, as amended from time to time, that enumerated 12 items, as specified motor vehicle parts, excepting the items covered by the said Notification, all others were exempt from duty. The appellant went on clearing the subject goods accordingly, availing benefit of the said Notification.

2. However, by means of the Finance Bill covering 1979 Budget, a change was brought in the T.I. 34A inasmuch as it was made to relate to specific items (15 in number), which change became effective with effect from 10-5-1979. The genesis of the dispute giving rise to the present appeal can be traced to this change in the Tariff.

3. The Department appears to have taken the view that T.I. 34A having become restrictive, covering 15 specified parts, the entry which would now be attracted to

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