WRIT PETITION NO.19366 OF 2024
9 Apr 2025...
Search Results for "Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944"
26 result(s) found
Found 26 result(s)
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Upholds State Sales Tax on Pan Masala and Gutkha in Multiple Appeals. State Legislatures Empowered to Levy Sales Tax on These Goods Despite Central Excise Levies, as They Are Not Declared Goods Under Section 14(ix) of Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
4 May 2023The Supreme Court disposed of a batch of appeals arising from judgments of three High Courts concerning the taxability of pan masala and gutkha under ...
- 164
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging GST Summons — Summons for Oral Evidence Held Valid. No Violation of Article 20(3) as Petitioner Not an Accused at Investigation Stage; Alternative Remedy Available Under CGST Act.
16 Feb 2021The petitioners, JSK Marketing Limited and its Managing Director, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before...
- 35
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging CBEC Circular on Brand Rate of Drawback. Court holds that an exporter can claim Brand Rate of drawback under Rule 7 of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 even after availing All Industry Rate under Rule 3.
1 Sep 2014The petitioner, Alfa Laval (India) Ltd., filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a Circular dated 30th Decemb...
- 121
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Assessee's Appeal in Central Excise Case — Stabilisation of Crude Oil Not 'Manufacture' Under Central Excise Act, 1944. The process of stabilising crude oil on process platforms does not amount to manufacture and stabilised crude oil is not excisable goods.
1 Mar 2013The appellant, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (ONGC), operates oil wells and process platforms in Mumbai Offshore. The extracted gas-oil mix ...
- 106
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Rejection of Brand Rate Drawback Claims for Tea Exports. Confirms revocation of brand rate letters and recovery of drawback amounts with interest due to failure to prove actual duty payment.
6 Oct 2010The petitioners, Hindustan Lever Limited and its shareholder, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an orde...
- 35
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging ESI Act Applicability to Bidi Manufacturer. Definition of Factory Under Section 2(12) ESI Act Includes Premises with Power-Aided Manufacturing Process, Home Workers Are Employees.
2 May 2006The petitioner, M/s. Ramchand Onkarlal Agarwal, a bidi manufacturer in Kamptee, Nagpur, challenged the applicability of the Employees' State Insurance...
- 189
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Allows Assessee’s Appeal in Excise Exemption Case: Commercial Meaning of ‘Hank’ Prevails Over Technical Definition. Notification Exempting Cotton Yarn Cleared in ‘Hanks’ Interpreted According to Trade Understanding Under Central Excise & Salt Act, 1944.
15 Oct 1969The appellant, a cotton spinning mill, manufactured cotton yarn of counts 20 to 32. In June 1962, the government issued a notification exempting cotto...
- 25
Supreme Court
2162
5 Feb 1968The appeal concerned the excise classification of a gas mixture generated during sugar manufacturing. The appellants, sugar companies, used a carbonat...
- 15
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Allows State’s Appeal in Sales Tax Matter Concerning Deduction of Excise Duty. Raw Tobacco and Processed Chewing Tobacco Constitute Different Marketable Products, So Excise Duty Paid on Raw Tobacco Cannot Be Deducted from Turnover of Chewing Tobacco Under Rule 5(1)(i) of Madras General Sales Tax (Turnover and Assessment) Rules, 1939.
14 Dec 1965The respondent, a tobacco factory in Vedaranyam, purchased raw tobacco and, after processing it, sold it as chewing tobacco. Excise duty under the Cen...
