Mittal Engineering Works P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise

1 SCC 203Supreme Court of India1997#7764 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also reported as

106 STC 201

Sections most often in play

Section 112Section 2(29AA)Section 2(29B)Section 2(42A)Section 43(6)Section 45Section 48Section 49

Issues it is cited on

section 50(1)section 2(42a)section 54esection 2(11)section 49section 112section 74section 43(6)long-term capital assetperiod of holdingsection 55full value of consideration

Judgments citing Mittal Engineering Works P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise

LIPI BOILERS LTD. THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AURANGABAD

C.A. No.-000856-000857 - 2011Supreme Court10 Nov 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

Section 11A(1)Section 35L(1)(b)

…2011 Page 38 of 57 surely would not be in consonance with accepted meaning of excisable goods and its exigibility to duty. (Emphasis supplied) 50. This Court in Mittal Engineering Works (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Meerut reported in (1997) 1 SCC 203, expressed its agreement with the observation in Quality Steel (supra) that erection and installation of a plant cannot be held to be an excisable good. This Court in Mittal Engineering (supra) observed as follows: “9. Upon the material placed upon record and referred to above, we are in no doubt that the mono vertical crystalliser has to be…

TATA COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the question of law referred to the Special Bench is answered in favour of the assessee

ITA 3515/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Arun Khodpiatata Communications Limited Pr. Cit, Videsh Sanchar Bhavan, Mumbai-1 Vs. M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 2808 C (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri J. D. Mistri Respondent By : Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey: The Present Appeal, At The Instance Of The Assessee, Assails Order Dated 21.03.2025, Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short), By Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (‘Ld. Pcit’ For Short), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Multiple Grounds, Both On Jurisdictional Issues As Well As On Merits, However, There Is Consensus Between The Parties That The Appeal Can Be Decided On Merits, In Which Event, There Is No Need To Go Into Various Other Issues Raised In Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri J. D. MistriFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 112Section 143(3)Section 263Section 50

…ecision before a coordinate or subordinate court. It is axiomatic that a decision cannot be relied upon in support of the proposition that it did not decide. (see Mittal Engineering Works P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1997] 106 STC 201 (SC) ; (1997) 1 SCC 203. Therefore, it is only the ratio decidendi, i.e., the principle of law that decides the dispute which can be relied upon as precedent and not any obiter dictum or casual observations. (See Girnar Traders v. State of Maharashtra (2007) 7 SCC 555 and Shin-Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd. v. Aksh Optifibre Ltd. (2005) 127 Comp Cas 97 (SC) ; (2005) 7 SCC 234.” (…

SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 261/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar & Chaitanya
Section 112Section 194CSection 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 50

…ecision before a coordinate or subordinate court. It is axiomatic that a decision cannot be relied upon in support of the proposition that it did not decide. (see Mittal Engineering Works P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1997] 106 STC 201 (SC) ; (1997) 1 SCC 203. Therefore, it is only the ratio decidendi, i.e., the principle of law that decides the dispute which can be relied upon as precedent and not any obiter dictum or casual observations. (See Girnar Traders v. State of Maharashtra (2007) 7 SCC 555 and Shin-Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd. v. Aksh Optifibre Ltd. (2005) 127 Comp Cas 97 (SC) ; (2005) 7 SCC 234." (…

ACIT 421 MUMBAI, MUMBAI CITY vs. SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI, MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the\nappeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1022/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2022-23
Section 112Section 194CSection 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 50

…sion before a\ncoordinate or subordinate court. It is axiomatic that a decision cannot be\nrelied upon in support of the proposition that it did not decide. (see Mittal\nEngineering Works P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1997] 106 STC 201\n(SC); (1997) 1 SCC 203. Therefore, it is only the ratio decidendi, i.e., the\nprinciple of law that decides the dispute which can be relied upon as\nprecedent and not any obiter dictum or casual observations. (See Girnar\nTraders v. State of Maharashtra (2007) 7 SCC 555 and Shin-Etsu Chemical\nCo. Ltd. v. Aksh Optifibre Ltd. (2005) 127 Comp Cas 97 (SC) ; (2005) 7 SCC\n23…

FRANK S INTERNATIONAL ITL LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(IT), CIRCLE (2)(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the question of law referred to the Special Bench is answered in favour of the\nassessee

ITA 5429/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2019-20
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 50Section 50(1)

…sion before a coordinate\nor subordinate court. It is axiomatic that a decision cannot be relied upon in\nsupport of the proposition that it did not decide. (see Mittal Engineering Works P.\nLtd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1997] 106 STC 201 (SC) ; (1997) 1 SCC 203.\nTherefore, it is only the ratio decidendi, i.e., the principle of law that decides the\ndispute which can be relied upon as precedent and not any obiter dictum or casual\nobservations. (See Girnar Traders v. State of Maharashtra (2007) 7 SCC 555 and\nShin-Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd. v. Aksh Optifibre Ltd. (2005) 127 Comp Cas 97 (SC)\n; (2005) 7 SCC 23…

M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LTD. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE III

C.A. No.-010409-010410 - 2014Supreme Court20 Nov 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

…bes (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, (1995) 2 SCC 372. (iii) Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd. & Anr v. Commissioner of Central Excise, (2000) 7 SCC 29. (iv) Mittal Engineering Works (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Meerut (1997) 1 SCC 203. [ (v) Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore v. Cethar Vessels Ltd. & Ors., (2009) 17 SCC 551. Page 21 of 76 (vi) Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. Indian Oil Corporation, 1991 Supp (2) SCC 18. (vii) Cellular Operators Association of India & Ors. V. Municipal Corporation of Delhi etc., 2011 SCC OnLine Del 2003. (viii…

DDIT, DEHRADUN vs. M/S. SMITH INTERNATIONAL INC., DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3909/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun10 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4561/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 3824/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Smith International Inc., Vs Adit, 806-807, Powai Plaza, Central International Taxation, Avenue, Hiranandani Garden, Dehradun Powai, Mumbai-400076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcs3148R

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. S. Mapwal, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 143Section 293ASection 42Section 44ASection 44BSection 44D

…me famous and applying their ratio to supposedly identical situations…..” (p. 1166) It is also settled law that a decision is not an authority on point, which was not argued as held in Mittal Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, [1997] 1 SCC 203). Also in A-One Granites v. State of UP reported in AIR 2001 SCW 848 it was observed as under: "The first question which falls' for consideration of this court is as to whether the question regarding applicability of rule 72 of the Rules in relation to the present lease is concluded by the earlier decision of this court rendered in Prem Nath Sharm…

SMITH INTERNATIONAL INC.,MUMBAI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3824/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun10 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4561/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 3824/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Smith International Inc., Vs Adit, 806-807, Powai Plaza, Central International Taxation, Avenue, Hiranandani Garden, Dehradun Powai, Mumbai-400076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcs3148R

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. S. Mapwal, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 143Section 293ASection 42Section 44ASection 44BSection 44D

…me famous and applying their ratio to supposedly identical situations…..” (p. 1166) It is also settled law that a decision is not an authority on point, which was not argued as held in Mittal Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, [1997] 1 SCC 203). Also in A-One Granites v. State of UP reported in AIR 2001 SCW 848 it was observed as under: "The first question which falls' for consideration of this court is as to whether the question regarding applicability of rule 72 of the Rules in relation to the present lease is concluded by the earlier decision of this court rendered in Prem Nath Sharm…

ADIT, DEHRADUN vs. M/S. SMITH INTERNATIONAL INC., DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4651/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun10 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4561/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 3824/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Smith International Inc., Vs Adit, 806-807, Powai Plaza, Central International Taxation, Avenue, Hiranandani Garden, Dehradun Powai, Mumbai-400076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcs3148R

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. S. Mapwal, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 143Section 293ASection 42Section 44ASection 44BSection 44D

…me famous and applying their ratio to supposedly identical situations…..” (p. 1166) It is also settled law that a decision is not an authority on point, which was not argued as held in Mittal Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, [1997] 1 SCC 203). Also in A-One Granites v. State of UP reported in AIR 2001 SCW 848 it was observed as under: "The first question which falls' for consideration of this court is as to whether the question regarding applicability of rule 72 of the Rules in relation to the present lease is concluded by the earlier decision of this court rendered in Prem Nath Sharm…

SMITH INTERNATIONAL INC.,MUMBAI vs. ADIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4561/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun10 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4561/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 3824/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Smith International Inc., Vs Adit, 806-807, Powai Plaza, Central International Taxation, Avenue, Hiranandani Garden, Dehradun Powai, Mumbai-400076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcs3148R

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. S. Mapwal, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 143Section 293ASection 42Section 44ASection 44BSection 44D

…me famous and applying their ratio to supposedly identical situations…..” (p. 1166) It is also settled law that a decision is not an authority on point, which was not argued as held in Mittal Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, [1997] 1 SCC 203). Also in A-One Granites v. State of UP reported in AIR 2001 SCW 848 it was observed as under: "The first question which falls' for consideration of this court is as to whether the question regarding applicability of rule 72 of the Rules in relation to the present lease is concluded by the earlier decision of this court rendered in Prem Nath Sharm…

DCIT CEN CIR 3(3) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. SHAREKHAN LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1187/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ecision before a coordinate or subordinate court. It is axiomatic that a decision cannot be relied upon in support of the proposition that it did not decide. (see Mittal Engineering Works P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1997] 106 STC 201 (SC) ; [1997] 1 SCC 203. Therefore, it is only the ratio decidendi, i.e., the principle of law that decides the dispute which can be relied upon as precedent and not any obiter dictum or casual observations. (See Girnar Traders v. State of Maharashtra [2007] 7 SCC 555 and Shin-Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd. v. Aksh Optifibre Ltd. [2005] 127 Comp Cas 97 (SC) ; [2005] 7 SCC 234. 11…

DCIT CEN CIR 3(3) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. SHAREKHAN LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1188/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ecision before a coordinate or subordinate court. It is axiomatic that a decision cannot be relied upon in support of the proposition that it did not decide. (see Mittal Engineering Works P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1997] 106 STC 201 (SC) ; [1997] 1 SCC 203. Therefore, it is only the ratio decidendi, i.e., the principle of law that decides the dispute which can be relied upon as precedent and not any obiter dictum or casual observations. (See Girnar Traders v. State of Maharashtra [2007] 7 SCC 555 and Shin-Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd. v. Aksh Optifibre Ltd. [2005] 127 Comp Cas 97 (SC) ; [2005] 7 SCC 234. 11…

SHAREKHAN LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 3(3), MUMBAI

ITA 469/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ecision before a coordinate or subordinate court. It is axiomatic that a decision cannot be relied upon in support of the proposition that it did not decide. (see Mittal Engineering Works P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1997] 106 STC 201 (SC) ; [1997] 1 SCC 203. Therefore, it is only the ratio decidendi, i.e., the principle of law that decides the dispute which can be relied upon as precedent and not any obiter dictum or casual observations. (See Girnar Traders v. State of Maharashtra [2007] 7 SCC 555 and Shin-Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd. v. Aksh Optifibre Ltd. [2005] 127 Comp Cas 97 (SC) ; [2005] 7 SCC 234. 11…

SHAREKHAN LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 3(3), MUMBAI

ITA 468/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ecision before a coordinate or subordinate court. It is axiomatic that a decision cannot be relied upon in support of the proposition that it did not decide. (see Mittal Engineering Works P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1997] 106 STC 201 (SC) ; [1997] 1 SCC 203. Therefore, it is only the ratio decidendi, i.e., the principle of law that decides the dispute which can be relied upon as precedent and not any obiter dictum or casual observations. (See Girnar Traders v. State of Maharashtra [2007] 7 SCC 555 and Shin-Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd. v. Aksh Optifibre Ltd. [2005] 127 Comp Cas 97 (SC) ; [2005] 7 SCC 234. 11…