COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE ETC. vs. M/S.AISHWARYA INDUSTRIES THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ETC

C.A. No.-006703-006710 - 2009Supreme Court2018 INSC 33413 April 2018Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI80 pages
For Petitioner: B. KRISHNA PRASADFor Respondent: E. C. AGRAWALA
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court held that coconut oil packed in small sachets/containers, suitable for use as hair oil, is classifiable under Heading 3305. This classification is based on the post-amendment tariff, the common parlance test, and the product's intended use.

What were the facts?

The case concerns the classification of coconut oil packed in small containers. The Revenue argued it should be classified as hair oil under Heading 3305, while the assessees contended it should be classified as edible oil under Heading 1513.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether coconut oil in small retail packs should be classified as edible oil or hair oil, considering the amendments to the Central Excise Tariff Act and the intended use of the product.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, Heading 1513, Heading 3305

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(29)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1766 OF 2009 COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE            ...APPELLANT       VERSUS MADHAN AGRO INDUSTRIES (I) PVT. LTD.   ...RESPONDENT WITH  CIVIL APPEAL Nos.6703­6710 OF 2009

J U D G M E N T RANJAN GOGOI, J.

1.

Aggrieved by the orders passed by the Customs, Excise   and   Service   Tax   Appellate   Tribunal   (CESTAT) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) holding that the coconut   oil   manufactured   and   packed   in   “small containers” by the respondent(s)­assessee(s) is classifiable under Heading 1513 and not under Heading 3305 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), the Revenue is in appeal before us.

2

2.

The dispute is with regard to classification of coconut   oil   in   packings   upto   2   litres   in   case   of   M/S Madhan Agro Industries the respondent­assessee in Civil Appeal No.1766 of 2009 and packings upto 500ml in case of the respondent(s)­assessee(s) in the connected appeals i.e.   Civil   Appeal   Nos.6703­6710   of   2009. The   relevant period   of   assessment   in   all   the   appeals   under consideration   i

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →