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

S.GROVER, G.SANKARAN, S.DUGGAL
Goodwin Rubber Works – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Cochin – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A. Balakrishna Pillai, K.E.N. Nambodia,K.D. Tayal

ORDER

S. Duggal, Member (Judicial)

1. This matter which was originally before the Central Government by way of revision petition under Section 36 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been received by the Tribunal as an appeal by virtue of provisions of Section 35P of the Act, and is being disposed of as such.

2. This appeal is directed against a composite order passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Madras whereby he disposed of appeals filed by the present appellant along with two appeals of other parties because there were identical questions for determination. This was by his order dated 11-2-1980, which had, in turn, confirmed the order passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Kottayam on 5-7-1978.

3. The facts giving rise to the controversy are to the effect that the appellants, claimed to be a partnership concern, is manufacturing certain products relating to tyre industry and it is alleged that one of the products which is finally turned out for clearance from the factory is termed as "tread rubber with cushion backing". They also manufacture a product which is described commonly as "cushion comp

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