Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

may 2004

Supreme Court of India · 2004-05-05

UGAM CHAND BHANDARI vs COMMR. OF C.E., MADRAS

Citation / case number
SC 1996/20226
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
UGAM CHAND BHANDARI
Respondent
COMMR. OF C.E., MADRAS
Author
G.P. MATHUR.
Bench
G.P. MATHUR. CJI

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court addressed the classification of waterproofed fabrics under the Central Excise Tariff, determining that such fabrics fall under Heading 59.06 as impregnated or coated textiles, rather than Heading 52.07 as claimed by the appellant. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the applicability of the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, affirming the imposition of penalties under rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Court concluded that the Tribunal's interpretation of the tariff headings was correct and consistent with the statutory provisions.

UGAM CHAND BHANDARI vs COMMR. OF C.E., MADRAS · Niyam