https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97393 The court held that duty should not be imposed again on already duty-paid printed containers post printing and lacquering. It emphasized the principle of "once duty paid always duty paid," ruling that duty recovery on containers not listed in the schedule when manufactured is unlawful. The judgment clarified that the 1980 amendment aimed to levy the same duty on all types of containers, rejecting the imposition of duty twice on the same container. It emphasized the importance of separate headings for different container types and directed that printed containers should be assessed duty-free to avoid double taxation within the same heading. en-us Tue, 17 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jan 2012 15:12:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97393 The court held that duty should not be imposed again on already duty-paid printed containers post printing and lacquering. It emphasized the principle of "once duty paid always duty paid," ruling that duty recovery on containers not listed in the schedule when manufactured is unlawful. The judgment clarified that the 1980 amendment aimed to levy the same duty on all types of containers, rejecting the imposition of duty twice on the same container. It emphasized the importance of separate headings for different container types and directed that printed containers should be assessed duty-free to avoid double taxation within the same heading. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97393