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

S.VENKATESAN, M.GOURI SHANKAR MURTHY, K.L.REKHI
Hico Products Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Bombay – Respondent


ORDER

S. Venkatesan, Sr. Vice-President

1. This is a revision application (hereinafter called "appeal") filed before the Central Government which under Section 35 P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, stands transferred to this Tribunal to be disposed of as if it were an appeal presented before the Tribunal.

2. The issue in this case is whether the goods manufactured by the appellants, and marketed under the name "Hicar-Ion" are assessable to duty under Item 65 of the Central Excise Tariff, as held by the Department, or under Item 68 ibid, as claimed by the appellants.

3. The matter came up before our predecessor Bench on 5-4-83. In its interlocutory order No. 20/83 of that date, the Bench rejected an application dated 15-2-83 from the appellants for permission to raise additional grounds under Rule 10 of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982. By the same order the Bench directed Shri K.D. Tayal, SDR, to ascertain how the Department was assessing similar products manufactured by two other companies. It was directed that the necessary information should be filed by 18-4-83.

4. In his letter dated 20-4-83 addressed to the Registrar, Shri

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