Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Commissioner Of Central Excise vs M/S Hindalco Industries Ltd.(Foils ... on 8 February, 2023

Bench: S. Ravindra Bhat, Dipankar Datta

                                         IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                         CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7561 OF 2009



     COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE                                               .....Appellant(s)


                                               Vs.


     M/S HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD.(FOILS DIVISION)
     THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR                                                         .....Respondent(s)



                                                          WITH

                                         CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5205 OF 2013


                                                          WITH


                                     CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7552-7555 OF 2013



                                                      O R D E R

The question which the revenue seeks to urge in these appeals are as to the true classification of aluminum casseroles manufactured with the aid of aluminum foils by the revenue. The revenue contended that the products are “containers”, falling in Chapter Heading 76.12 whereas the assessee-respondent contended that these casseroles were properly classifiable as aluminum trays. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by NEETA SAPRA Date: 2023.02.09 having considered the orders of the CESTAT, this Court is 17:30:47 IST Reason: of the opinion that the view expressed by the Tribunal is 1 correct. On an application of the common parlance test also having regard to the use of the products, (i.e. storing articles of food) and the explanatory note to the HSN, there can be no conclusion other than that arrived at by the CESTAT i.e. the goods are classifiable under heading 76.15.

The appeals are, therefore, dismissed.

...................J. (S. RAVINDRA BHAT) ....................J. (DIPANKAR DATTA) New Delhi;

February 08, 2023.





                                 2
ITEM NO.102                 COURT NO.14                  SECTION III

                S U P R E M E C O U R T O F       I N D I A
                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


Civil Appeal   No.   7561/2009


COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE                           Appellant(s)

                                  VERSUS

M/S HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD.(FOILS DIVISION) THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 5205/2013 (III) C.A. No. 7552-7555/2013 (XVII-A) Date : 08-02-2023 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA For Appellant(s) Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR Mr. N. Venkatraman, A.S.G. Ms. Sonia Mathur, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Chandra Prakash, Adv. Mr. Dharma Datta Verma, Adv. Mr. Divik Mathur, Adv.
Mr. Simarjeet Singh Saluja, Adv. Ms. Ronika Tater, Adv.
Ms. Pratiksha Mishra, Adv. Ms. Rupakshi Soni, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. M. P. Devanath, AOR Ms. Charanya Lakshmikumaran, Adv. Ms. Apeksha Mehta, Adv.
Ms. Falguni Gupta, Adv.
3
Ms. Neha Chaudhary, Adv.
Mr. R. Parthasarathy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeals are dismissed in terms of signed order.
All pending applications are disposed of.
(NEETA SAPRA) (MATHEW ABRAHAM) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) (Signed order is placed on the file) 4