Gainwell Commosales Private Limited vs -Ranchi Commissionerate on 23 August, 2023
· CCE, Bangalore v. Karnataka Soaps & Detergents ltd - 2017
(355) E.L.T. 161 (S.C.)
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.23 seconds)Documents citing
Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs Karnataka Soaps & Detergents Ltd on 22 July, 2015
Naga Ltd vs Collector C.Ex on 10 November, 2023
b. That the impugned order proceeds on a misconception as to the scope
of the expression “marketable” employed in the definition of “agricultural
produce” under Notification No.12/2017. It is settled law that the test for
marketability is that it should be capable of being sold and it is not necessary
that actual sale must take place. Reliance in this regard was placed on the
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “Indian Cable Co.Ltd., v.
CCE [1994] 74 ELT 22 (SC) and CCE v. Karataka Soaps & Detergents Ltd.
[2017] 355 ELT 161 (SC)”
c. That it is not in dispute even in the impugned order that the imported
wheat is capable of being sold as such in the primary market, as contemplated
in the definition of “agricultural produce”. Having found the above condition
being satisfied in respect of the services rendered by the 2nd respondent to the
petitioner, the denial of exemption under Serial No.54(e) Notification
No.12/2017 is clearly unjustifiable.
M/S Kailash Auto Builders Pvt. Ltd vs C.C.E. Bhopal on 11 November, 2016
5. Sh. R.K. Mishra, the Ld. AR appearing for the Revenue, on the other hand, reiterates the findings recorded in the impugned order. To substantiate his stand that confirmation of interest and penalty in the impugned order is in conformity with the statutory provisions, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgment of Honble Supreme Court, in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata vs Praxair India Pvt. Ltd. 2012 (278) ELT 579 (SC), judgment of Honble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE and ST LTU Bangalore vs Karnataka Soaps and Detergents Ltd. 2011 (267) ELT 593 (Kar.)
1