{"id":132456,"date":"1986-05-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1986-05-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986"},"modified":"2016-06-02T22:04:19","modified_gmt":"2016-06-02T16:34:19","slug":"sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986","title":{"rendered":"Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries … vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986"},"content":{"rendered":"
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Delhi<\/div>\n
Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries … vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1986 (9) ECC 7, 1986 (8) ECR 568 Tri Delhi, 1986 (25) ELT 843 Tri Del<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
 V.T. Raghavachari, Member (J)<\/p>\n
1. The appellants, M\/s Sri Krishna Tiles & Potteries (Madras) Private Ltd., are manufacturers of articles falling under TI 68 CET, some of which were exempt from duty and some of which were not. The period relevant for the present dispute is 1-4-1979 to 12-9-1979. In terms of Notification No. 89\/79 CE dated 1-3-1979 the appellants filed a claim on 26-9-1979 for refund of Rs. 11,886.83 and the same was allowed by the Assistant Collector. The Collector of Central Excise, Madras was of the view that in respect of goods which were not exempt from duty under TI 68 CET the appellants had paid duty properly during the period 1-4-1979 to 12-9-1979, and that the refund thereof was not justified in terms of Explanation V to the notification which was inserted in the Notification under amendment Notification No. 228 of 1979 dated 17-7-1979. Accordingly on 17-7-1980 he issued a show cause notice under Section 35A of the Central Excises and Salt Act. The appellants replied justifying the refund’ already ordered. On adjudication, the Collector of Central Excise, Madras, under his Order dated 15-11-1980, rejected the contention of the appellants and set aside the refund order in respect of an amount of Rs. 8,847.76p. The appellants made an application for rectification which was also rejected by the Collector under his order dated 18-4-1981. Thereupon the appellants preferred a revision petition to the Government of India which, on transfer, is now before us to be dealt with as an appeal.\n<\/p>\n
2.   We have heard Sri A.S. Chandrasekharan, advocate, for the appellants and Smt. Dolly Saxena for the Department.\n<\/p>\n
3.   There   is  no  dispute  that  the   value  of  the  capital   investment   made from   time   to   time   on   plant   and   machinery   installed  in  the   industrial  unit of the appellants was less than  Rs.  10 lakhs.  They  were, therefore, entitled to  benefit  under  Notification  No.  89\/79  with  reference  to goods  manufactured by them falling under TI 68 CET. The general effect of the Notification was   to   exempt   wholly   from   duty   the   first   clearances   upto   an   aggregate value   of   not   exceeding   Rs.   15   lakhs   and   to   remit   the   duty   in   excess   of four   per   cent   in  respect  of  the  clearances  for  the  aggregate   value  of  not exceeding   Rs.   15   lakhs   immediately   following   the   first   clearances   of   the value   of   Rs.   15   lakhs.   Under   para    I   of   the   Notification   the   exemption would   not   be   available   if   the   total   value   of   the   said   goods   cleared   for home   consumption   in   the   preceding   financial   year   had   exceeded   Rs.   30 lakhs.    The   dispute    in    the    present    instance   revolves   around   Explanation V to the Notification No. 228\/79 dated 17-7-1979. The same read as follows :\n<\/p>\n
 “For the purpose of computing the value of clearances under this Notification, the clearances of the said goods, which are exempted from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon by any other notification issued under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the aforesaid Rules and for the time being in force, shall not be taken into account”.\n<\/p>\n
The conclusion of the Collector in his order in review (and which is the contention for the department before us also) is that it is only from the date of insertion of this Explanation that the value of clearances of excisable goods falling under TI 68 (and exempted) are to be excluded in computing the value of clearances in the preceding year which will determine the eligibility of the assessee for exemption in the current year. But the contention for the appellant is that the provisions of Explanation V would have to be applied from 1-4-1979 itself, though it may have been inserted in the Notification on 17-7-1979.\n<\/p>\n
4.   The   normal   Rule   is   that   any   notification,   or   amendment   to   any notification,   would   come   into   effect   on   the   date   the   Rule   is   promulgated or   amendment   is   made   and   that   they   would   thus  be   prospective   and   not retrospective,  except  when  such retrospective effect  is  specifically  provided for  or  could  be  specifically  spelt-out. In the present case,  there  is no such provision   for   making   the   amendment   dated   17-7-1979   retrospective.   Nor could any such retrospective effect be inferred from any other circumstance available.    Therefore,    the   normal    Rule   will   prevail    that    the   amendment takes effect from the date of amendment (that is) 17-7-1979.\n<\/p>\n
5.   There are two purposes for which the value of clearances is relevant in notification No. 89\/79. First, the value of clearances in the preceding financial year (which should not exceed Rs. 30 lakhs) which is one of the eligibility criteria laid down in the notification. Second, the clearances during the (current) financial year – split into two parts, the first 15\/- lakhs (free of duty) and the second 15\/- lakhs (duty at 4%) – which are eligible for the benefit of the duty concession. It is evident that explanation V inserted on 17-7-1979 cannot have had retrospective effect in so far as the second purpose is concerned, (for the purpose of conferring duty exemption) unless expressly so stated. If that be so, there is no reason to suppose that for the first purpose, the said explanation V has to be given retrospective effect, by a process of interpretation. In this view of the matter, the Collector’s action in aggregating the value of dutiable goods cleared during the preceding financial year (1978-79) of the value of Rs. 14,42,860.81 and fully exempted goods of the value of Rs. 17,22,977.56 and, on the basis of the aggregate value of clearances of Rs. 31,65,838.37 during the year 1978-79, denying the benefit of duty relief, in terms of the notification, to goods cleared during 1-4-1979 to 16-7-1979 would appear to be prima facie in order.\n<\/p>\n
6.   The   learned   counsel   for   the   appellant   contended   before   us   that notification   No.   228\/79   dated   17-7-1979   (which   inserted   explanation   V in notification No. 88\/79 on 1-3-1979) was, as its preamble showed, an amending notification.  It   should,   therefore,   be   deemed   that   the   amendment  related back   to   the   date   of   the   amended   notification   –   No   authority   in   support of  this  contention  was  placed  before  us by  the Counsel. As noted earlier, it  is well-settled  that notifications take effect only from the date of their issue unless expressly provided otherwise.\n<\/p>\n
7.   The Counsel also contended that exempted goods were non-excisable goods   and,   therefore,   the   value  of  clearances   of  said  goods   ought  not  to be  included in  the  value of clearances for the purpose of notification 88\/79.\n<\/p>\n
In Vishal Andhra Industries v. Union of India – 1983-E.L.T.-2265 -the Delhi High Court has Ruled out the contention that excisable goods, on their being exempted by a notification under Rule 8, ceased to be excisable goods. To the same effect is the judgment of the Madras High Court in Tamil Nadu (Madras State) Handloom Weavers Co-operative Society Ltd. v. Assistant Collector of Central Excise, 1978-E.L.T.-J57.\n<\/p>\n
In State of Tamil Nadu v. M.K. Kandaswami etc., AIR 1975-S.C.-1871 (para 20), the Supreme Court construing the expression “goods the sale or purchase of which is liable to tax under the Act” (Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959), said that it excluded by necessary implication goods the sale or purchase of which is totally exempted at all points under Section 8 or Section 17(1) of the Act. The goods so exempted – not being “taxable goods” – cannot be brought to charge under Section 7A. This decision is in the context of the Sales Tax law. But we have, on the other hand, the Supreme Court’s judgment – Healthways Dairy Products Co. v. Union of India AIR-1976-SC-2271<\/a>  wherein the Court observed that if any goods specified in the Central Excise Tariff Schedule are exempted from the levy of excise duty by the Central Government by Rule 8(1) notification, it cannot affect the provision which requires licence to be taken out for the manufacture of the said goods. After considering this observation, the Gujarat High Court in Darshan Hoisery Works v. Union of India-1980-E.L.T.-390 has observed that if Rule 8(1) notification grants exemption, then, though the article is excisable, liability of pay excise duty is removed for the time being. From all these, it follows that, even on exemption, excisable goods continue to be excisable goods.\n<\/p>\n
The Counsel cited the Bombay High Court judgment in Apar Private Ltd. and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., 1985 (22) E.L.T.-644 – in support of his contention. The Apar case was on the question of leviability of customs duty on goods in respect of which an exemption was in force at the time of their entry into the territorial waters of India which exemption stood withdrawn when a bill of entry was filed for clearance of the goods through the customs. We have carefully gone through the judgment and can find nothing in it to support the proposition that excisable goods, on their being exempted, cease to be excisable goods.\n<\/p>\n
8.   The   learned   counsel   then   made   reference   to   an   application   for rectification of mistake presented by the applicants to the Collector subsequent   to   the   passing   of   the   order   by   the   Collector.   He   pointed-out   that this  has been  rejected  under  letter  dated   18-4-1981   as  if  it was an appeal against   the   order   of   the   Collector.   He   claims   that  such   a  rejection  was improper.  We have perused the said application purporting to be for rectification   of   an   error.   The   appellants   have   pointed   out   therein   that   out   of a   sum   of   Rs.   14,42,866.81   as   the   value   of   the   other   goods  (as   accepted by   the   Collector)   a   sum of   Rs.   13,72,338.24   would   have   related   to   tiles (falling   under   item   68)   exempt   under  Explanation   to  Notification   165\/76. We  observe   that   even   if   this   is   true   that   would   not   have   any   hearing  on the   result   of   the   review   proceedings.  Even   if  these   tiles  were  exempted goods,  the  value of clearance  thereof could not be  excluded till  17-7-1979 in   computing   the   value   of  the   clearances   in   the   preceding   year.   In   this view no relief could have been granted to the appellants in the application for  rectification   presented   by   them.   We   are,   therefore,  of  the   view  that the order of the Collector would not merit interference even on the basis of the allegation in this rectification application.\n<\/p>\n
9.   In  the  result,   the   view   taken   by   the  Collector  that  the  appellants became   eligible   for   exemption   in   terms  of  Notification   No.   89\/79  on   the basis   of   clearances   in   the   preceding  financial   year,   only   from   17-7-1979 and   that   they   were   not   eligible   for   refund   of   the   duty   paid   by   them  on the goods cleared between 1-4-1979 and 16-7-1979, is correct. The impugned order is upheld and the appeal is rejected.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Delhi Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries … vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986 Equivalent citations: 1986 (9) ECC 7, 1986 (8) ECR 568 Tri Delhi, 1986 (25) ELT 843 Tri Del ORDER V.T. Raghavachari, Member (J) 1. The appellants, M\/s Sri Krishna Tiles & Potteries (Madras) […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[41,33],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-132456","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-customs-excise-and-gold-tribunal-delhi","category-tribunal"],"yoast_head":"\nSri Krishna Tiles And Potteries ... vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries ... vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1986-05-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-02T16:34:19+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries … vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986\",\"datePublished\":\"1986-05-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-02T16:34:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986\"},\"wordCount\":1800,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi\",\"Tribunal\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986\",\"name\":\"Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries ... vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1986-05-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-02T16:34:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries … vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries ... vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries ... vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1986-05-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-02T16:34:19+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries … vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986","datePublished":"1986-05-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-02T16:34:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986"},"wordCount":1800,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi","Tribunal"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986","name":"Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries ... vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1986-05-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-02T16:34:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-krishna-tiles-and-potteries-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-7-may-1986#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri Krishna Tiles And Potteries … vs Collector Of Central Excise on 7 May, 1986"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132456","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=132456"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132456\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=132456"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=132456"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=132456"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}