Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.47 seconds)The Central Excise Act, 1944
J.K. Cotton Spinning And Weaving Mills ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 30 October, 1987
12. While the adjudicating Commissioner relied upon the decision in Majestic Auto case (supra), the Tribunal, however, distinguished that decision placing reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of J.K. Spinning & Weaving Mills - Vs - Union of India (1987 (32) ELT 234 (SC)).
Shyam Oil Cake Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise, Jaipur on 23 November, 2004
14. On facts, the Tribunal went in detail into the lease deed, the terms and conditions of the lease and the various clauses to come to the conclusion that there was no removal of goods as such from the premises of DCL and, therefore, held that the order of the adjudicating Commissioner is bad. The reasoning of the Tribunal, in the considered opinion of this Court, is a well considered reasoning and this Court finds no reason to differ with the view of the Tribunal, as we have considered the contentions and findings in extenso. The decisions relied on by the Tribunal in arriving at the above decision is also well founded and, therefore, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the same.
Hero Motors Ltd vs Commissioner, Central Excise, ... on 30 August, 2012
18. The above is the view succinctly expressed by the Allahabad High Court in Hero Motors case (supra). This Court is in agreement with the view expressed by the Allahabad High Court in the above-cited decision and the above decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. In view of the above, the interpretation with regard to Rule 3 (5) of CCR, 2004, as made by the Tribunal in the present case is fully justified and it calls for no interference at the hands of this Court.
The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950
The Customs Tariff Act, 1975
Majestic Auto Ltd. vs Cce on 20 July, 2004
15. On the questions of law framed above, at the outset, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the decision of Majestic Auto case (supra), which was relied upon by the jurisdictional Commissioner has since been reversed by the Allahabad High Court in Hero Motors Ltd. - Vs - Commissioner of Central Excise, Ghaziabad (2014 (310) ELT 729 (All.)). A cursory glance at the said decision would reveal that the case was also a case of lease and in the said case also the capital goods remained installed in the same premises and in the said circumstances, the Allahabad High Court held as under :-