Quality Steel Tubes (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, U.P

2 SCC 372Reported decision1995#23521 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Judgments citing Quality Steel Tubes (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, U.P

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)

…udgments to help us understand when an article would be considered as movable or immovable for the purpose of levying excise duty under the Act, 1944. 49. This Court in Quality Steel Tubes (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, U.P. reported in (1995) 2 SCC 372 dealt with the question whether the tube mill and welding head erected and installed by the assessee for manufacture of tubes and pipes out of duty-paid raw materials amounted to “excisable good” assessable to duty under the Act, 1944. This Court observed that, the basic test of levying duty under the Act, 1944 is two fold: One, that any articl…

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

…lector of Page 27 of 76 Central Excise, Hyderabad, (1998) 1 SCC 400; Narne Tulaman Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd. Hyderabad v. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad, 1989 (1) SCC 172; Quality Steel Tubes (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, U.P. (1995) 2 SCC 372 1995 and Mittal Engineering Works (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Meerut, (1997) 1 SCC 203; Triveni Engineering & Indus Ltd. v Commissioner of Central Excise, (2000) 7 SCC 29 and other decisions rendered by the Delhi High Court, and applied the permanency test to come to the definitive finding that the entire tower and shelter are fab…

CONVERGYTICS SOLUTIONS PVT LTD vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/6811/2022HC Karnataka30 Sept 2022

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

Section 482

…simultaneously steps have been taken to bring in such freezements in accordance with Section 102 of the Cr.P.C. and would seek to place reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of TEESTA ATUL SETALVAD v. STATE OF GUJARAT reported in (2018) 2 SCC 372 to buttress the submission that in the event of suspicion account can be frozen under Section 102 of the Cr.P.C. 7 6. This Court, while entertaining the petition, had passed an interim order permitting the petitioner to operate the accounts only for limited purposes as could be gathered from the interim order dated 30-03-2022, rea…