Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.22 seconds)

D.C.M. Limited & Another vs Union Of India & Another on 13 August, 1996

Learned counsel also argued that Section 68 of the Act makes it clear that when the importer of any warehoused goods intends to clear them for home consumption, then a bill of entry for home consumption has be to be filed, and the import duty leviable on such goods has to be paid by the importer, as was held in D.C.M. & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Anr. 6. Learned counsel submitted that Section 9 of the Act makes it clear that clearance from a Bonded warehouse is to be treated as an import into India. It was also stressed that clearance of vessel was in terms of the exemption notification, which stipulated payment of appropriate customs duty prevalent at the time of its breaking.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 25 - K Venkataswami - Full Document

Hansraj Gordhandas vs H. H. Dave, Assistant Collector Of ... on 27 September, 1968

Reliance was placed on the decisions of this Court in Hansraj Gordhandas Vs. H.H. Dave, Assistant Collector of Central Excise & Customs, Surat & Ors.7; Novopan India Ltd., Hyderabad Vs. 6 1995 Supp (3) SCC 223 7 (1969) 2 SCR 253 1 Collector of Central Excise And Customs, Hyderabad8 and Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Indore Vs. Parenteral Drugs India Ltd.9 to contend that the terms of an exemption notification have to be construed strictly.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 216 - V Ramaswami - Full Document
1   2 Next