TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Upholds Tribunal's Interpretation on Industrial Unit Investments</h1> <h3>COLLR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE Versus RECKITT COLMAN OF INDIA LTD.</h3> COLLR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE Versus RECKITT COLMAN OF INDIA LTD. - 1997 (92) E.L.T. 457 (S.C.) Issues involved: The computation of investments made in an industrial unit under Notification No. 89/79-C.E., dated 1-3-1979, concerning the exemption of certain goods under Central Excise Rules.Comprehensive Details:1. Computation of Investments in Industrial Unit: The issue in question pertains to the computation of investments made in an industrial unit as per Notification No. 89/79-C.E., dated 1-3-1979, under Central Excise Rules. The Notification exempts certain goods from duty of excise based on specific conditions related to capital investment in plant and machinery within the industrial unit.2. Interpretation of Proviso: The dispute revolves around the Proviso of the Notification, which requires the Central Excise Officer to ensure that the total value of capital investment in plant and machinery in the industrial unit does not exceed rupees ten lakhs. The term 'industrial unit' is distinct from a factory and is a recognized concept within the Excise Department, often licensed separately for different sections of a factory.3. Consistency in Tribunal's Decisions: The Tribunal's order, which aligns with past decisions and interpretations, has been upheld, emphasizing the consistent understanding of the term 'industrial unit' within the Excise Department. Previous cases, including those affirmed by the Supreme Court, have supported this interpretation, indicating a standard approach in similar matters.4. Judicial Interpretation: The Tribunal's interpretation of Notification No. 89/79-C.E., dated 1-3-1979, is deemed appropriate in the present case, considering the established understanding of 'industrial unit' and the factual context. The Tribunal's decision is upheld, affirming the correctness of the interpretation applied.5. Conclusion: The appeal challenging the Tribunal's order is dismissed, with no costs imposed. The Tribunal's consistent interpretation of the Notification regarding investments in an industrial unit stands affirmed, based on established legal principles and past precedents.This summary encapsulates the key aspects and rulings of the Supreme Court judgment regarding the computation of investments in an industrial unit under the specified Notification, emphasizing the significance of the Proviso and the consistent interpretation by the Tribunal and higher courts.
TaxTMI 