Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.18 seconds)Union Of India vs Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. & Ors on 29 October, 2003
In the light of above observations and by following the Honble Supreme Courts decision in the case of Union of India Vs. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. 2003 (158) E.L.T. (S.C.)
Section 2 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
M/S Heg Limited (Sponge Iron Division) vs C.C.E.Raipur on 2 November, 2015
3. Though we note that inclusion of the said product under the tariff is subsequent to the decision to the above decision of the Tribunal in the same appellants case, but keeping in view the findings arrived at by the Tribunal that dolochar cannot be held to be a manufactured item, by following the earlier decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd. [2003 (158) ELT 3 (S.C.)], we hold that the appellant has been able to make out a prima facie case in its favour as it is well settled that the entry of particular product in the tariff by itself would not satisfy the definition of manufacture as appearing in Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act.
M/S.Vishal Pipes Ltd vs Commissioner, Central Excise, Noida on 22 March, 2012
and CESTAT decision in the case of Vishal Pipes Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida 2010 (255) E.L.T. 532 (Tri.-Delhi) we are of the considered view that the items Char/Dolchar are not manufactured or excisable goods. Therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable and is hereby set aside.
1