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

P.C.JAIN, ARCHANA WADHWA
Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta-II – Appellant
Versus
Berger Paints India Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
T. Premkumar,T.K. Ramasubramanayam

ORDER

Per Shri P.C. Jain, Member (T) :

Short question involved in this matter is whether conversion of duty paid "araldite" in cake-form under erstwhile Central Excise Tariff Item 15A (1) and purchased from outside into a solution by dissolving it in petroleum-based solvents make the latter again liable to duty under the same tariff entry 15A (1).

2. Original authority, namely Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta-II has held that the solution of "Araldite", in the above circumstances is not liable to duty again. It held that the process does not amount to manufacture of another commodity. "Araldite" resin in cake-form is converted to another form i.e. solution without bringing into existence another commodity known to the trade having a different name, character and use. The said authority, in coming to the aforesaid conclusion, has relied on several judgements of Courts and the Tribunal which are as follows:-

(1) M/s. Coromandal Prodorite (P) Ltd. Vs. Government of India [1985 (20) ELT 257 (MAD)]

(2) State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Pyarelal Malhotra [1983 ELT 1582 (S.C.)]

(3) M/s. Swadeshi Mills Co. Vs. Union of India 1982 ELT 237 (Bom)]

(4) Golden Paper Udyog (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central

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