Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.26 seconds)Union Of India & Ors. Etc. Etc vs Bombay Tyre International Ltd. Etc. Etc on 7 October, 1983
27. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in their judgment in the case of Bombay Tyres International (supra) referred to their earlier decision in the case of Atic Industries Ltd. v. Assistant Collector, Central Excise, 1978 (2) E.L.T. J 444 wherein it has been observed that
"once the goods have entered the stream of trade and are on their onward journey to the consumer, whether along a short or a long course depending on the nature of the goods and the conditions of the trade, excise is not concerned with what happens subsequently to the goods. It is the first immediate contact between the manufacturer and the trade that is made decisive for determining the wholesale cash price which is to be the measure of the value of the goods for the purpose of excise."
Collector Of Central Excise vs Century Spinning And Manufacturing Co. ... on 25 October, 1985
In the classification list there was no indication in that case that the amounts were recovered from the customers, either as service charges or as manufacturing charges.
Real Drinks (P) Ltd. vs Collector Of Central Excise on 5 February, 1991
34. The Tribunal in that case had observed that if a deduction is permissible to the assessee under the law on the basis of the real nature of the cost then there was no reason as to why it should not be permitted. They held that the deduction towards replacement of bottles and replacement/repair of crates was a permissible deduction.
Vijayawada Bottling Co. Ltd. vs Collector Of Central Excise on 8 May, 1992
49. The Tribunal in that case had observed that service charges were includible in the assessable value. The Tribunal observed that service charges realised from customers for unloading, brand-wise sorting, broken bottles sorting and cleaning of bottles prior to sending them to automatic washing plant were the activities preparatory to and part of manufacture of the product.
Collector Of Central Excise, Madras vs Indian Oxygen Ltd on 2 August, 1988
57. Sums borrowed from the Banks are in the nature of working capital and the purpose was the collection of capital for manufacturing activities. Without bottles, aerated water could not be sold. Without crates glass bottles could not be transported even upto the factory gate. Loan from the Banks for such activities could not be considered for any other than the manufacturing activity. They were not for any ancillary or incidental activity, not connected with the activity of manufacture, but for the ancillary or incidential "activity of manufacture" in the manner as referred to by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Indian Oxygen Ltd., 1988 (36) E.L.T. 730 (S.C.).
The Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. And Anr. vs Union Of India And Anr. on 29 May, 1992
In the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. Union of India 1992 (57) E.L.T. 396 (Bom.), the matter related to interest and bank charges on drafts.
Standard Electric Appliances vs Superintendent Of Central Excise And ... on 15 March, 1978
In the case of Standard Electric Appliances v. Superintendent of Central Excise, 1979 (4) E.L.T. (J 53) it had been clarified by the Madras High Court that if from the purchaser the manufacturer had collected the price not at the concessional rate but at the full rate then the department can demand difference in duty.
Collector Of Central Excise vs Premier Oxygen And Acetylene Co. (P) ... on 10 July, 1985
In the case - Collector, Central Excise, Indore v. Premier Oxygen and Acetylene Company Pvt. Ltd., 1985 (22) E.L.T. 61 (CEGAT), the oxygen gas was delivered in cylinders and it was not shown that the charges towards retention and holding of the cylinders were directly relatable to or were influencing the price at the point of delivery of the gas. Admittedly, no such charges were collected if the cylinders were returned within the free period.