Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.20 seconds)

Collector Of Central Excise vs Coromandel Paints And Chemicals Ltd. on 9 July, 1985

In the cited case of [Collector of Central Excise v. Kalinga Paints & Chemicals Industries - 1989 (44) E.L.T. 548] aluminium medium and aluminium paste were put together in a common packet. The Tribunal held that in such condition the commodity which was manufactured only on admixure thereof could not be called to come into existence while the two ingredients were packed separately. In the present case as long as the three ingredients were carried separately they retained their separate identities of duty paid goods. Only when they would be mixed together in certain proportions, would they merge and emerge as a newly manufactured commodity. As long as this substances were stored and carried independently they retained their identities and could not fall under the ambit of the aforesaid Rule. The belief of the Commissioner that these three ingredients carried separately in the same van were prepared explosives incomplete or unprepared form has no substance and must be rejected.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu Cites 1 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

Jaypee Rewa Cement vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, M.P on 22 August, 2001

5. As the second argument before him the assessees claimed that the goods on final mixing at the time at which they assumed the identity of prepared explosive would be entitled to the benefit of Notifications No. 63/95-C.E., which exempted goods manufactured in mines or in workshops situated in the precincts of mines and intended for use in such mines. The Commissioner held that in terms of the misapplied rule of interpretation, the goods having come into existence before entering the mines, the benefit was not available. On this ground he denied the benefit of notification. He also referred to Supreme Court judgment in the case of Jaypee Rewa Cement v. Commissioner of Central Excise, M.P. [2001 (133) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)] which had no bearing on the issues before him.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 81 - Full Document
1