Maruti Suzuki India v. CCE

318 ELT 353Reported decision2015#13152 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 80-IA(8)/(10)Section 80-ICSection 2(29BA)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(29ba)section 32asection 80icchildsection 80isection 32section 80section 15transfercompanyindianfac

Judgments citing Maruti Suzuki India v. CCE

M/S. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2011-12, 2012-

ITA 1950/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 80

…CIT (supra), the assessee was packaging drinking water, and it was held that the packaged water served the same purpose as normal water and therefore, there was no commercially distinct product. Similarly, in the case of Maruti Suzuki India vs. CCE (2015) 318 ELT 353, the facts were that the assessee was putting ED coating on bumpers and grills and therefore, it was held that the bumpers ITA Nos.1946-1950/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/s. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd. :: 23 :: and grills, irrespective of the ED coating remained the same and there was no change in the charac…

M/S. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2011-12, 2012-

ITA 1948/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 80

…CIT (supra), the assessee was packaging drinking water, and it was held that the packaged water served the same purpose as normal water and therefore, there was no commercially distinct product. Similarly, in the case of Maruti Suzuki India vs. CCE (2015) 318 ELT 353, the facts were that the assessee was putting ED coating on bumpers and grills and therefore, it was held that the bumpers ITA Nos.1946-1950/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/s. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd. :: 23 :: and grills, irrespective of the ED coating remained the same and there was no change in the charac…

M/S.Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2011-12, 2012-

ITA 1947/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 80

…CIT (supra), the assessee was packaging drinking water, and it was held that the packaged water served the same purpose as normal water and therefore, there was no commercially distinct product. Similarly, in the case of Maruti Suzuki India vs. CCE (2015) 318 ELT 353, the facts were that the assessee was putting ED coating on bumpers and grills and therefore, it was held that the bumpers ITA Nos.1946-1950/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/s. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd. :: 23 :: and grills, irrespective of the ED coating remained the same and there was no change in the charac…

M/S. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2011-12, 2012-

ITA 1946/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 80

…CIT (supra), the assessee was packaging drinking water, and it was held that the packaged water served the same purpose as normal water and therefore, there was no commercially distinct product. Similarly, in the case of Maruti Suzuki India vs. CCE (2015) 318 ELT 353, the facts were that the assessee was putting ED coating on bumpers and grills and therefore, it was held that the bumpers ITA Nos.1946-1950/Chny/2025 (AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2018-19) M/s. Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd. :: 23 :: and grills, irrespective of the ED coating remained the same and there was no change in the charac…

Asst.C.I.T., Bellary vs. M/S Hothur Traders 100% Eou, Bellary

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for asst

ITA 32/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazita No.32/Bang/2016 (Asst. Years 2010-11 & 2011-12) The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Bellary. . Appellant Vs. M/S Hothur Traders 100% Eou, No.85,6,7&8, Infantry Road, Cantonment, Bellary. . Respondent Pan –Aaefh7705H. Co No.55/Bang/2016 (By Assessee) Appellant By : Shri Nagendra Prasad, Cit Respondent By : Shri B.S Balachandran, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 22-11-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 19-01-2018

For Appellant: Shri Nagendra Prasad, CITFor Respondent: Shri B.S Balachandran, Advocate
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 40

…ad relied on the following decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the context of the Central Excise Act to decide whether the activity of processing of iron ore constitutes ‘manufacture’ or ‘production’, namely, (i) Maruti Suzuki Ltd., Vs. CCE (2015) 32 GSTR 28 (SC); (ii) Satnam Overseas Ltd., Vs. CCE (2015) 32 GSTR 121 (SC) and (iii) Servo-Med Industries (P) Ltd., Vs. CCE (2015) 32 GSTR 404 (SC) 3.11.3 In the above decisions, the Hon’ble Apex Court laid down certain tests to decide whether a process is ‘manufacture’ or ‘process’. These tests, outlined in the decision in the case of ILC Industries Ltd.,…

M/S Ilc Industries Ltd., Hospet vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1009/BANG/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Zain Ahmed Khan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40aSection 80Section 80H

…[1984] 15 ELT 7, 11 (Ker). The court referred to Corpus Juris Secundum Vol. 55 p. 667 and Vol. 72 page 1208). 12.7 Very recently, in the context of provisions of Central Excise Act, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs. CCE (2015) 32 GSTR 28 (SC), held that only that activity as a result of which a transformation has taken place viz., new different article emerges having a distinct name, character or use, can only said to be a manufacturing activity. The Hon’ble Supreme Court further held that mere value addition without change in name, character or end-use of goods cannot possibly co…

M/S Ilc Industries Ltd., Hospet vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1008/BANG/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Zain Ahmed Khan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40aSection 80Section 80H

…[1984] 15 ELT 7, 11 (Ker). The court referred to Corpus Juris Secundum Vol. 55 p. 667 and Vol. 72 page 1208). 12.7 Very recently, in the context of provisions of Central Excise Act, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs. CCE (2015) 32 GSTR 28 (SC), held that only that activity as a result of which a transformation has taken place viz., new different article emerges having a distinct name, character or use, can only said to be a manufacturing activity. The Hon’ble Supreme Court further held that mere value addition without change in name, character or end-use of goods cannot possibly co…

M/S Ilc Industries Ltd., Hospet vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 767/BANG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Zain Ahmed Khan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40aSection 80Section 80H

…[1984] 15 ELT 7, 11 (Ker). The court referred to Corpus Juris Secundum Vol. 55 p. 667 and Vol. 72 page 1208). 12.7 Very recently, in the context of provisions of Central Excise Act, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs. CCE (2015) 32 GSTR 28 (SC), held that only that activity as a result of which a transformation has taken place viz., new different article emerges having a distinct name, character or use, can only said to be a manufacturing activity. The Hon’ble Supreme Court further held that mere value addition without change in name, character or end-use of goods cannot possibly co…

Maruti Suzuki India v. CCE (318 ELT 353) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax