Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.26 seconds)Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985
Section 2 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
Union Of India vs Delhi Cloth & General Mills on 12 October, 1962
"The Act charges duty on manufacture of goods.
The word "manufacture" implies a change but
every change in the raw material is not manu-
facture. There must be such a transformation
that a new and different article must emerge
having a distinctive name, character or use.
The duty is levied on goods. As the Act does
not define goods, the legislature must be
taken to have used that word in its ordinary,
dictionary meaning. The dictionary meaning is
that to become goods it must be something
which can ordinarily come to the market to be
bought and sold and is known to the market.
(emphasis supplied). That it would be such an
article which would attract the Act was
brought out in Union of India v. Delhi Cloth &
General Mills Ltd., [1963] Suppl 1 SCR 586."
South Bihar Sugar Mills Ltd., Etc vs Union Of India & Ors on 5 February, 1968
for the purposes of the Central Excises and
Salt Act, 1944 and observed that "to become
'goods' an article must be something which can
ordinarily come to the market to be bought and
sold", a definition which was reiterated by
this Court in South Bihar Sugar Mills Ltd. v.
Union of India."
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Union Carbide India Limited vs Union Of India And Ors on 4 April, 1986
This view was reiterated again in Union Carbide India
Ltd. v. Union of India, [1986] 2 SCC 547 where Pathak, J. as
the learned Chief Justice then was, speaking for the Court
observed that in order to attract excise duty the article
manufactured must be capable of sale to a consumer. The
expression "goods manufactured or produced" must refer to
goods which are capable of being sold to the consumer. This
Court observed as follows:
1