https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166758 A successor nationalised textile undertaking was not liable for handloom cess demanded for the period before 1-4-1974, because pre-appointed-day liabilities remained enforceable against the erstwhile owner and not against the successor entity. Grey markin was held liable to handloom cess as "cloth", since the charging definition was read with the relevant excise tariff meaning and construed to advance the levy's object rather than defeat it by a narrow reading. The cess was also not confined to goods on which basic excise duty had actually been collected, as it operated as an additional levy collected in the same manner as excise duty. en-us Tue, 22 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Nov 2014 12:04:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166758 A successor nationalised textile undertaking was not liable for handloom cess demanded for the period before 1-4-1974, because pre-appointed-day liabilities remained enforceable against the erstwhile owner and not against the successor entity. Grey markin was held liable to handloom cess as "cloth", since the charging definition was read with the relevant excise tariff meaning and construed to advance the levy's object rather than defeat it by a narrow reading. The cess was also not confined to goods on which basic excise duty had actually been collected, as it operated as an additional levy collected in the same manner as excise duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166758