9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (3) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge of this Court held that the said product manufactured and marketed by the appellant is liable to Excise Duty. In coming to the aforesaid conclusion the learned Single Judge relied on a decision rendered by Chittatosh Mookerjee, J. (as he then was) in Nilsin Company v. Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta and Orissa and Others reported in 1985 (22) E.L.T. 739 (Cal.). In that case it was held that 'Ultramarine blue' is understood by the people conversant with the product as pigment i.e. as a colorant. 3. In the case of Nilsin Company (supra) a judgment of the Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in Union of India and Others v. C.M.C. India, Ahmedabad reported in 1979 (4) E.L.T. (J 298) was relied on by the Writ Petitioner. In that case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Union of India and others against the said decision of the learned Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad. The said High Court also reversed the decision of the trial court in another suit for similar reliefs brought by Jaynal Tarachand and others and decreed the suit. The learned Judges of the Gujarat High Court by the same judgment allowed a writ petition filed by M/s. Nilsin Industries and another and directed the Union of India to refund the excise duty levied for a period of three years prior to the filing of the writ petition upon the petitioner's product ultramarine blue. It is stated that the above matters are now pending before the Supreme Court." 4. The Supreme Court disposed of the Appeals preferred by the Union of India aga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od in common language. (See Ramavatar Budhaiprasad v. Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Akola reported in AIR 1961 SC 1325; Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh v. Jaswant Singh Charan Singh reported in AIR 1967 SC 1454; Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax v. G.S. Pai Co. reported in AIR 1980 SC 611. 8. We may add that a Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court in Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Jodhpur v. Rajasthan Chemical Corporation reported in (1987) 65 STC 356 held that in common parlance "neel" (ultramarine blue) is understood as a substance which is used to whiten clothes. It is not understood as a colour and it cannot be said that "neel" is a pigment. 9. Allahabad High Court in Commissioner, Sales Tax v. Ram Babu and Company r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
