Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Commissioner of Central Excise Commissionerate, Jalandhar Vs M/s Afcons Pauling Joint Venture (Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh)
Appeal Number : C.E.A. No. 23 of 2004
Date of Judgement/Order : 29/01/2009
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

There was a divergent view of the various High Courts whether crushing of bigger stones or boulders into smaller pieces amounts to manufacture. In view of the divergent views, of the various High Courts, there was a bona fide doubt as to whether or not such an activity amounted to manufacture. This being the position, it cannot be said that merely because the appellants did not take out a licence and did not pay the duty the provisions of Section 11A got attracted.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.E.A. No. 23 of 2004

Commissioner of Central Excise Commissionerate, Jalandhar …Appellant

Versus

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031