Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Withdrawal of benefits under Notification No. 119/75: Fancy Yarn classified as new product</h1> <h3>BHARAT COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES LTD. Versus CCE., CHANDIGARH</h3> The case involved issues regarding the withdrawal of benefits under Notification No. 119/75, classification of Fancy Yarn as a new product, and the ... Job work - Yarn Issues Involved:1. Withdrawal of benefit under Notification No. 119/75.2. Classification of the resultant product (Fancy Yarn) as a new product.3. Application of the principle of manufacture in its primary sense.4. Applicability of the precedent set by the National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd. case.5. Consideration of the Madura Coats Ltd. case.Detailed Analysis:1. Withdrawal of Benefit under Notification No. 119/75:The appellants were initially permitted to avail the benefit of Notification No. 119/75 and pay duty on job charges as per the classification list approved on 20-12-1979. However, the Assistant Collector later amended the classification list on 16-1-1980, disallowing the benefit without giving a hearing to the appellants. The appellants paid the duty under protest and requested provisional assessment, which was refused.2. Classification of the Resultant Product (Fancy Yarn) as a New Product:The Tribunal examined whether the process of doubling and twisting yarn amounted to the manufacture of a new product. The department argued that the resultant product, Fancy Yarn, was a new variety with a distinct commercial identity and use, thus classifiable under residuary item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff.3. Application of the Principle of Manufacture in its Primary Sense:The Tribunal referred to the decision in the National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd. case, which emphasized that the process applied by the job worker should not be in the nature of manufacture in its primary sense. The resultant product should not lose its essential identity entirely but retain it subject to the manufacturing process.4. Applicability of the Precedent Set by the National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd. Case:The Tribunal noted that the National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd. case involved a chemical reaction resulting in a new product where the original identity was lost. This principle was applied to determine whether the process of twisting yarn could be considered manufacture in its primary sense.5. Consideration of the Madura Coats Ltd. Case:The Tribunal also considered the Madura Coats Ltd. case, where it was held that no new product was manufactured if the original materials could still be perceived in the final product. The Tribunal found that in the present case, the original yarns were still perceivable in the Fancy Yarn, similar to the Madura Coats Ltd. case.Separate Judgments:Majority Opinion (V.T. Raghavachari and G. Sankaran):The majority held that the benefit of Notification No. 119/75 was not available to the appellants. They concluded that the resultant yarn was a new product arising from manufacture in its primary sense, thus not qualifying for the notification's benefit. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.Dissenting Opinion (K. Prakash Anand):K. Prakash Anand disagreed with the majority, arguing that the facts were similar to the Madura Coats Ltd. case, where the original materials were still perceivable in the final product. He opined that the process did not result in a new product in the primary sense of manufacture and allowed the appeal.Final Order:In view of the majority opinion, the benefit of Notification No. 119/75 was not available to the appellants for the subject goods cleared by them. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found