Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise

23 ELT 313Reported decision#12440 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2021.

Judgments citing Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise

Canon India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, National Faceless Assesment Center, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 468/DEL/2021[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla[Assessment Year: 2004-05]

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 244A

…ut the liability to pay the duty is postponed till the time of removal under Rule 9- A of the said Rules. In this connection, reference may be made to the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise (1986 23 ELT 313) (Karn HC)), where it was decided that the words 'as being subject to a duty of excise' appearing in section 2(d) of the Act are only descriptive of the goods and do not relate to the actual levy. "Excisable goods", it was held, do not become non-excisable goods merely by reason of the exemption given under a notification.' 56. Therefore, it foll…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hcl Comnet Systems & Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 922/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlashri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 14ASection 251(1)

…ut the liability to pay the duty is postponed till the time of removal under Rule 9- A of the said Rules. In this connection, reference may be made to the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise (1986 23 ELT 313) (Karn HC)), where it was decided that the words 'as being subject to a duty of excise' appearing in section 2(d) of the Act are only descriptive of the goods and do not relate to the actual levy. "Excisable goods", it was held, do not become non-excisable goods merely by reason of the exemption given under a notification.' 56. Therefore, it foll…

M/S. Hcl Comnet Systems and Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 835/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlashri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 14ASection 251(1)

…ut the liability to pay the duty is postponed till the time of removal under Rule 9- A of the said Rules. In this connection, reference may be made to the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise (1986 23 ELT 313) (Karn HC)), where it was decided that the words 'as being subject to a duty of excise' appearing in section 2(d) of the Act are only descriptive of the goods and do not relate to the actual levy. "Excisable goods", it was held, do not become non-excisable goods merely by reason of the exemption given under a notification.' 56. Therefore, it foll…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hcl Comnet Systems and Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5924/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlashri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 14ASection 251(1)

…ut the liability to pay the duty is postponed till the time of removal under Rule 9- A of the said Rules. In this connection, reference may be made to the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise (1986 23 ELT 313) (Karn HC)), where it was decided that the words 'as being subject to a duty of excise' appearing in section 2(d) of the Act are only descriptive of the goods and do not relate to the actual levy. "Excisable goods", it was held, do not become non-excisable goods merely by reason of the exemption given under a notification.' 56. Therefore, it foll…

M/S. Hcl Comnet Systems and Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5555/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlashri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 14ASection 251(1)

…ut the liability to pay the duty is postponed till the time of removal under Rule 9- A of the said Rules. In this connection, reference may be made to the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise (1986 23 ELT 313) (Karn HC)), where it was decided that the words 'as being subject to a duty of excise' appearing in section 2(d) of the Act are only descriptive of the goods and do not relate to the actual levy. "Excisable goods", it was held, do not become non-excisable goods merely by reason of the exemption given under a notification.' 56. Therefore, it foll…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Hcl Comnet Systems & Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6181/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlashri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 14ASection 251(1)

…ut the liability to pay the duty is postponed till the time of removal under Rule 9- A of the said Rules. In this connection, reference may be made to the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise (1986 23 ELT 313) (Karn HC)), where it was decided that the words 'as being subject to a duty of excise' appearing in section 2(d) of the Act are only descriptive of the goods and do not relate to the actual levy. "Excisable goods", it was held, do not become non-excisable goods merely by reason of the exemption given under a notification.' 56. Therefore, it foll…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Wipro Ltd

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/211/2009HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

…he liability to pay the duty is postponed till the time of removal under Rule 9- A of the said Rules. In this connection, reference may be made to the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise (1986 23 ELT 313) (Karn HC)), where it was decided that the words `as being subject to a duty of excise’ appearing in section 2(d) of the Act are only descriptive of the goods and do not relate to the actual levy. “Excisable goods”, it was held, do not become non-excisable goods merely by reason of the exemption given under a notification. 56. Therefore…

M/S Wipro Limited vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/881/2008HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

…he liability to pay the duty is postponed till the time of removal under Rule 9- A of the said Rules. In this connection, reference may be made to the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise (1986 23 ELT 313) (Karn HC)), where it was decided that the words `as being subject to a duty of excise’ appearing in section 2(d) of the Act are only descriptive of the goods and do not relate to the actual levy. “Excisable goods”, it was held, do not become non-excisable goods merely by reason of the exemption given under a notification. 56. Therefore…

Karnataka Cement Pipe Factory v. Supdt. Of Central Excise (23 ELT 313) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax