Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (2.82 seconds)
Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner (Ct) on 28 February, 2023 cites

Swadeshi Polytex Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise on 23 November, 1989

The ‘manufacturing loss’ forms part of the raw material “used” in the manufacture though not reflected in the final product. The relief, as we understand the notification, that has to be given to the manufacturer was in respect of the duty already paid on the raw material used in the manufacture of the final product. That is, the relief has to be given to the extent of the duty paid on the input material and not with reference to the quantity which ultimately forms part of the final product. This is also the ratio of the judgment in Swadeshi Polytex Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise (1990) 2 SCC 358. So understood we have no doubt that even the manufacturing loss will have to be taken into account in determining the relief to be provided under the said notification. We are also unable to understand the argument of the Revenue based on the difficulty in arriving at the manufacturing loss. If there is any difficulty it is for the manufacturer who claims the relief to prove the loss. There are also scientific methods of arriving at the loss."
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 63 - S Mukharji - Full Document

Union Of India vs B.S. Agarwal And Anr. Etc on 29 September, 1997

16. For the above reasons, the impugned Circular dated 20.10.2011 insofar as it is contrary to the law declared by this Court with regard to manufacturing/invisible loss is set-aside. Wherever the challenge is to the notice it is open to the appellants/petitioners to submit their objections which 1 Madhav Rao Jivaji Rao Scindia v. Union of India, (1971) 1 SCC 85, Union of India v. B.S. Agarwal, (1997) 8 SCC 89, Westminster City Council V. Debenhams PLC.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 58 - G N Ray - Full Document
1   2 Next