KUMAR JAGDISH CH SINHA Vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA
LAWS(CAL)-1963-9-25
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on September 13,1963

Kumar Jagdish Ch Sinha Appellant
VERSUS
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

CEYLON UNIVERSITY V/S. FARNANDO [REFERRED]
<RC>LAWSUIT(CAL) 1963 0 239;ELT 2000 124 118;</RC> HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA <JGN>DURGADAS BASU</JGN> KUMAR JAGDISH CH SINHA COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE,CALCUTTA <AT>CIVIL RULE 128 OF 1961</AT> 13.09.1963 <SUBJECT>CUSTOMS,EXCISE</SUBJECT><SI> CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALT ACT,1944 SEC 35;CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALT ACT,1944 SEC 35(2);CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALT ACT,1944 SEC 36;CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALT ACT,1944 SEC 35(1);CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALT ACT,1944 SEC 12;SEA CUSTOMS ACT,1878 SEC 189; <ACT>CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALT ACT,1944</ACT> <S>S.35</S><ACT>CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALT ACT,1944</ACT> <S>S.35(2)</S><ACT>CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALT ACT,1944</ACT> <S>S.36</S><ACT>CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALT ACT,1944</ACT> <S>S.35(1)</S><ACT>CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALT ACT,1944</ACT> <S>S.12</S><ACT>SEA CUSTOMS [REFERRED TO]
P JOSEPH JOHN VS. STATE OF TRAVANCORE COCHIN [REFERRED]
NEW PRAKASH TRANSPORT COMPANY LIMITED VS. NEW SUWARNA TRANSPORT COMPANY LIMITED [REFERRED]
SOHAN LAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED]
F N ROY VS. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS CALCUTTA [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA VS. T R VARNA [REFERRED]
C A ABRAHAM VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER KOTTAYAM [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA VS. GHAUS MOHAMMAD [REFERRED]
COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS CALCUTTA VS. EAST INDIA COMMERCIAL CO LTD [REFERRED]
LEWIS PUGH EVANS PUGH VS. ASHUTOSH SEN [REFERRED]



Cited Judgements :-

VARUN SILK MILLS (P) LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & CUS. [LAWS(GJH)-2011-12-328] [REFERRED TO]
VARUN SILK MILLS (P) LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SURAT [LAWS(CE)-2010-7-17] [REFERRED TO]
AMARSON WOOLLEN MILLS AND VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [LAWS(CE)-2003-11-324] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This petition under Article 226, is directed against an order of demand under Rule 9(2) of the Rules framed under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, dated 18-8-1958, issued by the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta (Respondent No. 1) which is at page 32 of the annexure to the petition, directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 1,03,216/5/- as excise duty payable in respect of the period 28-2-1954 to 25-3-1957.
(2.)The petitioner's case in short, is that he was the lessee of the Sarat Textiles Ltd., situate at Cossipore, for 5 years from 6-11-1953 but that he surrendered the said lease with effect from 1-4-1957. The licences of the Sarat Textiles empowered it to operate power-driven mills with non-cotton yarns only. The petitioner alleges that from February, 1954, the petitioner had been manufacturing fabrics with staple fibre yarn, which was a non-excisable goods under the Act and that, accordingly, he did not file any declaration or return as required by the Act in respect of excisable goods.
(3.)The impugned order, which is a speaking order gives the facts as well as the grounds upon which the assessment and demand has been made. The order, in short, states that during the period 28-2-1954 to 23-3-1957, the petitioner produced Artificial Silk Fabric, which was an excisable goods under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and that since he removed the goods from the place of production, in contravention of Rule 9(1) of the Rules made under the Act, the demand was being made under Rule 9(2) of the said Rules.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.