Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.33 seconds)
Documents citing Jaysynth Dyechem Pvt. Ltd. vs Union Of India on 11 September, 1990

Collector Of Central Excise, Meerut vs Modi Rubber Ltd on 9 October, 2001

In the case of Jaysynth Dyechem Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (1991, 51 ELT 246), the Bombay High Court was construing an exemption notification in which a proviso similar to the one which is contained in Notification No. 95/83 was construed by the High Court. The High Court held that the said proviso deals with the procedure to be followed in availing of set off of countervailing customs duty paid on imported intermediaries, but does not import the substantive provision of Rule 56A so as to defeat the exemption. It is not necessary, in the present case, to go into the question of interplay of Notification No. 95/83 and Rule 56A. The view taken by us does not rest on any substantive provision of Rule 56A.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 18 - P V Reddi - Full Document

Collector Of Central Excise vs Modi Rubber Ltd. on 21 February, 1994

6. We find that the Ld. Counsel for the Respondents has correctly pointed out that the matter is also covered against the Revenue by the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of jaysynth Dyechem Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, wherein while interpretating Notfn. No. 103/61, the Court has held that the requirement in relation to the exemption that the procedure set out in Rule 56A should be followed could not have the effect of importation of the substantive provisions of Rule 56A and denying the advantage of exemption under Notfn. Para 4 of the said judgment is reproduced below:
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1