CCE v. Richardson Hindustan Ltd.

9 SCC 156Reported decision2004#25826 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,375 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2023.

Judgments citing CCE v. Richardson Hindustan Ltd.

Commissioner of Customs Central Excise and Service Tax Hyderabad vs. Ashwani Homeo Pharmacy

C.A. No.-009525 - 2018Supreme Court03 May 2023

Bench: The Commissioner Of Customs & Central Excise ........................ 9 Before The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ............ 18 Rival Submissions .................................................................................... 24 Points For Determination ........................................................................... 31 The Principles In The Cited Decisions ......................................................... 33 Application Of The Principles & Twin Test ................................................ 55 Whether Re-Look At Classification Of The Product In Question Justified ........ 72 Conclusion ................................................................................................ 76

Section 11

…1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9525 OF 2018 COMMISSSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, HYDERABAD …APPELLANT VERSUS ASHWANI HOMEO PHARMACY …RESPONDENT JUDGMENT DINESH MAHESHWARI, J. Table of Contents Preliminary and brief outline ....................................................................... 2 The Background: Show-Cause Notice and Reply ...................................... 4 Before the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise ........................ 9 Before the Customs, E…

Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur vs. Baidynath Ayurwed Bhawan Ltd

Appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-004048-004048 - 2001Supreme Court13 Apr 2009

…h the courts. This is what this Court observed: ”…. In order to determine whether a product is a cosmetic or a medicament a twin test has find favour with the courts. The test has approval of this Court also vide CCE v. Richardson Hindustan {(2004) 9 SCC 156}. There is no dispute about this as even the Department accepts that the test is determinative for the issue involved. The tests are: I. Whether the item is commonly understood as medicament which is called the common parlance test. For this test it will have to be 10 (2006) 3 SCC 266 2 seen whether in common parlance the item is acce…

Commnr. of Central Excise, Delhi vs. M/S. Ishaan Research Lab. (P) Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

C.A. No.-007357-007372 - 2001Supreme Court08 Sept 2008

Section 11ASection 4(4)(c)

…“REPORTABLE” IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.7357-7372 OF 2001 Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi …. Appellant Versus Ishaan Research Lab (P) Ltd. & Ors. …. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.2517 OF 2002 Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi …. Appellant Versus Ishaan Research Lab (P) Ltd. …. Respondent J U D G M E N T V.S. SIRPURKAR, J 1. This judgment will dispose of Civil Appeal Nos.7357-7372 of 2001 as also the Civil Appeal No.2517 of 2002. 2. All these appeals relate to the order passed by Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi whereb…