{"id":172504,"date":"2007-12-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-12-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007"},"modified":"2018-09-21T20:57:14","modified_gmt":"2018-09-21T15:27:14","slug":"fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007","title":{"rendered":"Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, &#8230; on 3 December, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, &#8230; on 3 December, 2007<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Bhan<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Ashok Bhan, V.S. Sirpurkar<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  8066-8068 of 2001\n\nPETITIONER:\nFedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd\n\nRESPONDENT:\nCommissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 03\/12\/2007\n\nBENCH:\nASHOK BHAN &amp; V.S. SIRPURKAR\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8066-8068 of 2001<\/p>\n<p>BHAN, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>1.\tThe present appeals under Section 35L(b) of the<br \/>\nCentral Excise Act, 1944 (for short &#8220;the Act&#8221;) have been<br \/>\nfiled by the assessee against the impugned final Order<br \/>\nnos. 242-244\/2001-B dated 1st May, 2001 in appeal Nos.<br \/>\nE\/761-763\/98-B passed by the Customs, Excise &amp; Gold<br \/>\n(Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short &#8220;the<br \/>\nTribunal&#8221;), rejecting the appeals filed by the appellant<br \/>\non merits and limitation.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe issue before the Tribunal was, whether the<br \/>\nappellant was manufacturing split air-conditioners<br \/>\nclassifiable under Tariff Heading 84.15 of the Central<br \/>\nExcise Tariff Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tThe appellant, Fedders Lloyd Corporation Ltd.,<br \/>\ncleared condensing units from their unit at Kalkaji, New<br \/>\nDelhi to Mumbai, where the appellant purchased cooling<br \/>\nunits from local manufacturers fabricated on order with<br \/>\nmotors, etc., supplied by the appellant.  After carrying<br \/>\nout certain tests for quality by filling  gas, affixing<br \/>\nthe brand name `Fedders Lloyd&#8217;, the complete unit was<br \/>\ncleared along with pipe kits, electrical cord, remote<br \/>\ncontrol, etc., to various customers from their<br \/>\nwarehouse\/godown at Mumbai.  The invoices were raised by<br \/>\nthe appellant&#8217;s Mumbai office for supply of split air-<br \/>\nconditioners.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tA show cause notice dated 3rd April, 1996 was issued<br \/>\nto the appellant, alleging that 412 nos. split air-<br \/>\nconditioners were clandestinely removed by the appellant<br \/>\nwithout payment of duty, involving evasion of central<br \/>\nexcise duty to the tune of Rs.56,14,293\/- during the<br \/>\nperiod  October 1991 to April 1996.  It was also stated<br \/>\nthat the department was unaware of the fact that the<br \/>\nappellant was manufacturing split air-conditioners.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tThe demand raised in the show cause notice was<br \/>\nconfirmed in the order-in-original.  Appeals filed by<br \/>\nthe appellant before the Tribunal were dismissed.<br \/>\nAggrieved against the same, the present appeals have<br \/>\nbeen filed.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tCounsels for the parties have been heard at length.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tRecords reveal that during the course of<br \/>\ninvestigation, statements of Shri Shivshankar Upadhyay,<br \/>\npartner of New Gold Air Conditioners, who had supplied<br \/>\nthe cooling units to the Mumbai Branch of the appellant,<br \/>\nwas recorded wherein he confirmed that they had filed a<br \/>\ndeclaration with the excise authorities that they were<br \/>\nmanufacturing sheet metal bodies of air-conditioners.<br \/>\nHe also confirmed that the electric motors to be fitted<br \/>\nwith cooling units were supplied by the appellant.<br \/>\nStatement of Shri R.P. Gupta, Commercial Manager of the<br \/>\nappellant, was also recorded wherein he had stated that<br \/>\nthe appellant had supplied electrical motors to be<br \/>\nfitted with the cooling units to the local manufacturers<br \/>\nso that check on the quality can be kept.  These cooling<br \/>\nunits were received by them at their godown at<br \/>\nKunjurmarg from where complete units of split air-<br \/>\nconditioners were supplied to various customers.  That<br \/>\nthe complete units of split air-conditioners were<br \/>\ndelivered after putting together condensing units<br \/>\nreceived from New Delhi and cooling units procured<br \/>\nlocally along with other associates and that their<br \/>\ninvoice was raised from Mumbai administrative office.<br \/>\nShri K.A. Bhatia, Project Manager of Air Serco Pvt.<br \/>\nLtd., whose statement was also recorded, stated that<br \/>\nafter receiving the air-conditioners complete in all<br \/>\nrespect along with necessary accessories, were supplied<br \/>\nby the appellant to Air Serco Pvt. Ltd., which is a<br \/>\nsister concern of the appellant and undertakes the job<br \/>\nof installation and servicing of air-conditioners at<br \/>\nMumbai. Statement of Shri K. Vijayan, Commercial<br \/>\nExecutive of the appellant, was also recorded wherein he<br \/>\nstated, inter alia, that he was looking after the<br \/>\nfinished stores of the appellant at Devidayal Compound,<br \/>\nKanjumarg, situated in the premises of M\/s. Air Serco<br \/>\nPvt. Ltd. and that his job was to look after the stock<br \/>\nof the finished goods received in the godown from New<br \/>\nDelhi and from local manufacturers such as New Gold Air-<br \/>\nconditioners, and to maintain relevant records.  He<br \/>\nfurther stated that at Kanjumarg godown, before delivery<br \/>\nof the split air-conditioners, gas is filled in the<br \/>\ncondenser for carrying out certain checks for leakage of<br \/>\ngas.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tFrom the statements of S\/Shri Shivshankar Upadhyay,<br \/>\nR.P. Gupta, K. A. Bhatia and K. Vijayan, it is evident<br \/>\nthat the appellant&#8217;s Mumbai Branch received condensing<br \/>\nunits cleared from their manufacturing unit at New Delhi<br \/>\non payment of appropriate central excise duty as parts<br \/>\nof air-conditioners and procured cooling units<br \/>\nmanufactured locally at Mumbai.  At their workshop-cum-<br \/>\ngodown, certain checks for quality were conducted by<br \/>\nfilling the gas and the brand name &#8220;Fedders Lloyd&#8221; was<br \/>\naffixed on the cooling units and, thereafter, these<br \/>\nunits were cleared along with pipe kits, electrical<br \/>\ncord, remote control etc. to various customers and the<br \/>\nsame was installed by the appellant&#8217;s sister concern,<br \/>\nM\/s. Air Serco Pvt. Ltd., on behalf of the appellant.<br \/>\nThe invoice was raised by the appellant&#8217;s Mumbai office<br \/>\nfor supply of split air-conditioners.  No excise duty<br \/>\nwas paid on such split air-conditioners as they were<br \/>\nsupplied from Mumbai to their various customers in<br \/>\nGujarat and Goa.  The statements of these persons<br \/>\nclearly show that a complete split air-conditioner came<br \/>\ninto existence at Kanjumarg Workshop of the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tWe do not find any substance in the submissions<br \/>\nadvanced on behalf of the appellant that no change in<br \/>\nthe name, character and use of the product or<br \/>\ntransformation of the raw material into finished product<br \/>\ncame into existence; the cooling units or condensing<br \/>\nunits by themselves cannot function as air-conditioners.<br \/>\nThey have to be joined together with pipe kits,<br \/>\nelectrical cord and remote control, etc. to function as<br \/>\na complete air conditioner unit.  This process was<br \/>\ncarried at the factory-cum-godown of the appellant at<br \/>\nKunjurmarg.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tSection 2(f) of the Central Excise Act defines<br \/>\n&#8220;manufacutre&#8221; as:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;(f) &#8220;manufacture&#8221; includes any process, &#8212;\n<\/p>\n<p>(i)\tincidental or ancillary to the<br \/>\ncompletion of a manufactured<br \/>\nproduct; and<\/p>\n<p>(ii)\twhich is specified in relation to<br \/>\nany goods in the Section or<br \/>\nChapter notes of the Schedule to<br \/>\nthe Central Excise Tariff Act,<br \/>\n1985 (5 of 1986) as amounting to<br \/>\nmanufacture&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>11. \tClause (f) gives an inclusive definition of the<br \/>\nterm &#8220;manufacture&#8221;.  According to the dictionary, the<br \/>\nterm &#8220;manufacture&#8221; means a process which results in an<br \/>\nalteration or change in the goods which are subjected to<br \/>\nthe process of manufacturing leading to the production<br \/>\nof a commercially new article.  As to what constitutes<br \/>\nmanufacture would depend upon the facts of each case.<br \/>\nAs noticed earlier, condensing units were manufactured<br \/>\nby the appellant at its factory at New Delhi and the<br \/>\ncooling units were procured from the local market for<br \/>\nwhich the electrical motors were supplied by the<br \/>\nappellant.  Neither the condensing unit nor the cooling<br \/>\nunit by itself is a complete air conditioner.  It is<br \/>\nonly when these two, i.e. condensing unit and cooling<br \/>\nunits are put together the complete unit of air<br \/>\nconditioner fit for use came into existence at the<br \/>\nKanjumarg workshop.  Air conditioner is a commercially<br \/>\nnew article than either the condensing unit or the<br \/>\ncooling unit.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tFor the reasons state above, the contention of the<br \/>\nappellant that there is no manufacture at their Bombay<br \/>\nUnit stands belied and cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.\tThe Tribunal in its order has relied upon Rule 2(a)<br \/>\nof the Rules of Interpretation. Counsel for the<br \/>\nappellant has contended that the said rule is not<br \/>\napplicable.  In our view, reference to the applicability<br \/>\nof the rule 2(a) is not necessary and the matter can be<br \/>\ndecided without reference to that rule.  The issue of<br \/>\nclearing complete units of air-conditioners from Bombay<br \/>\nBranch of the appellant was evident from the depositions<br \/>\nof the appellant&#8217;s own employees and the partners of New<br \/>\nGold Air-conditioners who had supplied the cooling units<br \/>\nand the invoice raised by the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>14.\tFor the foregoing reasons, we have no reason to<br \/>\ndiffer with the concurrent findings on facts recorded by<br \/>\nthe authorities below that the appellant was indeed<br \/>\nmanufacturing the split air-conditioners, as stated in<br \/>\nthe show cause notice.\n<\/p>\n<p>15.\tThe appeals are dismissed, accordingly, with no order<br \/>\nas to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, &#8230; on 3 December, 2007 Author: Bhan Bench: Ashok Bhan, V.S. Sirpurkar CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 8066-8068 of 2001 PETITIONER: Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd RESPONDENT: Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03\/12\/2007 BENCH: ASHOK BHAN &amp; V.S. SIRPURKAR JUDGMENT: J [&hellip;]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-172504","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 3 December, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 3 December, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2007-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-21T15:27:14+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, &#8230; on 3 December, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-21T15:27:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1341,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007\",\"name\":\"Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 3 December, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-21T15:27:14+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, &#8230; on 3 December, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 3 December, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 3 December, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-21T15:27:14+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, &#8230; on 3 December, 2007","datePublished":"2007-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-21T15:27:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007"},"wordCount":1341,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007","name":"Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 3 December, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-21T15:27:14+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/fedders-lloyd-corportion-ltd-vs-commissioner-of-central-excise-on-3-december-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Fedders Lloyd Corportion Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, &#8230; on 3 December, 2007"}]},{"@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\/172504","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=172504"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/172504\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=172504"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=172504"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=172504"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}