BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

2 results for “section 68”+ Section 50clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi5,551Mumbai4,740Bangalore1,401Kolkata1,188Ahmedabad1,095Chennai1,091Jaipur929Hyderabad818Karnataka688Pune589Indore508Surat503Chandigarh498Raipur290Cochin287Rajkot229Visakhapatnam212Nagpur152Cuttack130Amritsar123Telangana122Lucknow121Guwahati101Calcutta84Jabalpur74Jodhpur73Allahabad72Agra72SC65Ranchi62Patna57Panaji41Dehradun31Varanasi18Rajasthan12Orissa11Kerala5Uttarakhand4Gauhati3ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Andhra Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE HYDERABAD vs. M/S SARVOTHAM CARE LIMITED

C.A. No.-004480-004480 - 2005Supreme Court14 May 2015
Section 11ASection 4A

50 ml and 5 ml. Dispute is about the classification of the aforesaid product for the purposes of payment of central excise duty. The respondent had filed the declaration classifying the said product under CSH 3003.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 on the ground that it is basically a medicine. However, as per the Civil Appeal

M/S. SERVO-MED INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment is hereby set aside

C.A. No.-000583-000583 - 2005Supreme Court07 May 2015
Section 2

Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, there is no mention of the test of integral or inextricable process and found that the wrong test had been applied to arrive at the wrong result. 5. The CESTAT in turn set aside the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) observing: “An Article with distinct brand name