{"id":176961,"date":"2011-02-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-02-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011"},"modified":"2016-11-26T08:04:28","modified_gmt":"2016-11-26T02:34:28","slug":"the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011","title":{"rendered":"The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011<\/div>\n
Bench: J.P. Devadhar, Mridula Bhatkar<\/div>\n
                                                                 Cexa 139.05\n                                    1\n\n         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n            ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION\n\n\n\n\n                                                                \n                 CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.139\/2005\n\n\n\n\n                                        \n     The Commissioner of Central Excise,\n     Mumbai-V,\n     5th Floor,Utpad Shulk Bhavan,\n\n\n\n\n                                       \n     Plot no.C-24, Sector-E,\n     Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (E),\n     Mumbai-400 051                                        Appellant\n            Vs.\n\n\n\n\n                             \n     M\/s GTC Industries Ltd.,\n     Tobacco House,\n              \n     Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 056                            Respondent\n             \n     Mr.A.S.Rao a\/w Mr.S.D.Bhosale for applellant\n     Mr.V.Sridharan a\/w Mr.Prakash Shah i\/b P.D.S.Legal for\n     respondent\n      \n\n\n           CORAM-J.P.DEVADHAR AND\n   \n\n\n\n                 MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR ,JJ\n           RESERVED ON - 13TH JANUARY,2011.\n           PRONOUNCED ON -2nd FEBRUARY,2011.\n\n\n\n\n\n     J U D G M E N T (Per Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,J.)\n<\/pre>\n
     .                   This appeal was admitted on the following<\/p>\n
     questions of law.\n<\/p>\n
                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span><\/p>\n
                                                                  Cexa 139.05
\n                                    2<\/span><\/p>\n
          1     Whether in the facts and circumstances of the<\/p>\n
                case and in law, the Tribunal is right in holding<\/p>\n
                that no classification list is necessary as the<\/p>\n
                embossing and cutting to shape of Aluminium foil<\/p>\n
                is not a manufacturing process ?\n<\/p>\n
          2     Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case<\/p>\n
                and in law, the Tribunal is right in holding that the<\/p>\n
                process of embossing on aluminium paper back<\/p>\n
                foil and cutting it to shape for the purpose of<\/p>\n
                packing of the cigarettes does not amount to<\/p>\n
                manufacture ?\n<\/p>\n
     2          This appeal is filed by the Commissioner of<\/p>\n
     Central Excise, Mumbai-V challenging the order dated<\/p>\n
     19\/4\/2005 passed by the CESTAT. The respondent (‘assessee’<\/p>\n
     for short) is the manufacturer of cigarettes and falling under<\/p>\n
     CH.S.H.2403.11 scheduled to CETA 1985. The assessee used<\/p>\n
                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                  Cexa 139.05
\n                                    3<\/span><\/p>\n
     duty paid paper back aluminium foil in the roll form for the<\/p>\n
     purpose of packing cigarettes. In the process the cigarette roll<\/p>\n
     is cut to size and got embossed with word ‘PULL’ and is<\/p>\n
     wrapped in the cigarette.\n<\/p>\n
     3           As per notification dated 13\/5\/1988 the duty paid<\/p>\n
     aluminium foil when cut and embossed,the resultant product<\/p>\n
     was exempted from payment of excise duty. However, the<\/p>\n
     government withdrew the said notification by a notification<\/p>\n
     no.44\/94 dated 1\/3\/1994 . Thereupon, the respondent filed<\/p>\n
     Classification List 9\/94 \/Aluminium foil dated 26\/4\/1994,<\/p>\n
     under protest classifying the products as aluminium foil cut to<\/p>\n
     shape under tariff 7607.30 and aluminium foil embossed<\/p>\n
     under CSH 7607.20. During the pendencyof the approval of<\/p>\n
     the classification list the assessee paid excise duty on cut to<\/p>\n
     shape\/embossed aluminium foil @ 20%as per tariff heading<\/p>\n
     7607.30 and 7607.20. The Assistant Commissioner vide order<\/p>\n
     dated 1\/7\/1994      held that the aluminium foil cut to<\/p>\n
                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                 Cexa 139.05
\n                                   4<\/span><\/p>\n
     shape\/embossed which is used for packing cigarettes does not<\/p>\n
     amount of manufacture and accordingly returned the<\/p>\n
     classification list submitted by the assessee. Being aggrieved<\/p>\n
     by order dated 1\/7\/1994 the appellant preferred an appeal<\/p>\n
     before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) who<\/p>\n
     dismissed the said appeal by order dated 9\/3\/1999. Being<\/p>\n
     aggrieved by the said order of the Commissioner of Central<\/p>\n
     Excise the appellant filed appeal before the CESTAT and the<\/p>\n
     said appeal was also dismissed by order dated 19\/5\/2005 by<\/p>\n
     the CESTAT. Hence the appellant has filed this appeal under<\/p>\n
     section 35(G) of the Act .\n<\/p>\n
     4           Learned counsel Mr.Rao appearing for the<\/p>\n
     appellant made two fold submissions. He argued that the<\/p>\n
     process of embossing itself is manufacturing and the product<\/p>\n
     that emerges on embossing is a new product. Secondly<\/p>\n
     aluminium foil brought in bulk by the assessee on payment of<\/p>\n
     excise duty is also subjected to the process of cutting it into<\/p>\n
                                       ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                  Cexa 139.05
\n                                   5<\/span><\/p>\n
     small pieces which changes the form and nature of the foil and<\/p>\n
     hence the said process            amounts to manufacturing.\n<\/p>\n
     Accordingly counsel for the revenue submitted that the order<\/p>\n
     passed by the CESTAT is liable to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n
     5           Mr.Sridharan,learned counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n
     assessee in reply submitted that the assessee purchases a roll<\/p>\n
     of aluminium foil with backing of white paper and the roll is<\/p>\n
     cut in pieces and on one side of each piece word ‘PULL’ is<\/p>\n
     embossed in which the cigarettes are filled in with the help of<\/p>\n
     machine and Aluminium paper back foil holding cigarettes is<\/p>\n
     directly placed in cigarette packing machine . The cigarettes<\/p>\n
     are filled in aluminium foil in such a way that word ‘PULL’<\/p>\n
     comes on the upper side of the packet. The learned counsel<\/p>\n
     submitted that the aluminium foil backed with a white paper<\/p>\n
     purchased by the assessee is itself a excisable commodity.\n<\/p>\n
     When the paper foil is cut to the size it does not change its<\/p>\n
     nature and form and embossing word ‘PULL’ also does not<\/p>\n
                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                  Cexa 139.05
\n                                    6<\/span><\/p>\n
     add any different character or value to the said aluminium foil<\/p>\n
     therefore , aluminium foil used in the cigarettes packet is not<\/p>\n
     dutiable commodity. He further submitted that a foil is a<\/p>\n
     barrier for moisture and so it is used to protect the cigarettes<\/p>\n
     from moisture.\n<\/p>\n
     6           The learned counsel in support of his submissions<\/p>\n
     relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in Commissioner of<\/p>\n
     Central Excise New Delhi Vs.S.R.Tissues Pvt.Ltd.2005(186)<\/p>\n
     E.L.T.385 (S.C.). However, the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
     appellant Department controverted and submitted that the ratio<\/p>\n
     of the Apex Court in respect of aluminium foil is not<\/p>\n
     applicable to the present set of facts. In that case the tissue<\/p>\n
     paper was cut and slit into various shapes                  and sizes<\/p>\n
     from a jumbo roll of tissue paper. In the present case the<\/p>\n
     aluminium foil and paper backing is not only cut to pieces but<\/p>\n
     the word ‘PULL’ is also embossed on it and further the said<\/p>\n
     piece of aluminium foil is used as a shell for cigarettes . Thus,<\/p>\n
                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                  Cexa 139.05
\n                                    7<\/span><\/p>\n
     its nature , form and purpose is changed and therefore, the said<\/p>\n
     ruling is distinguishable .\n<\/p>\n
     7           Use of aluminium foil which is cut to the size and<\/p>\n
     embossed is in a continuous process of packing the cigarettes<\/p>\n
     in the packets. Manufacturing as defined in section 2(f) of the<\/p>\n
     Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 includes any process<\/p>\n
     enumerated therein. However, all the processes would not<\/p>\n
     amount to manufacturing under the Act. Process is not defined<\/p>\n
     under the Act . So it is understood in a common parlance. The<\/p>\n
     process may be           a flow , progress , movement,<\/p>\n
     transformation,change continuation,a link , an action ,<\/p>\n
     happening,etc.. Any process which produces                distinct and<\/p>\n
     identifiable commodity and renders marketable value the can<\/p>\n
     be called manufacture.A commodity whether manufactured or<\/p>\n
     not necessarily depends on the context and the factors of the<\/p>\n
     production\/process of that commodity.\n<\/p>\n
                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span><\/p>\n
                                                                   Cexa 139.05
\n                                     8<\/span><\/p>\n
     8           In the present case a roll of aluminium foil backed<\/p>\n
     with white thin paper is purchased by the respondent for the<\/p>\n
     purpose of packing their product i.e.cigarettes . In the roll<\/p>\n
     there is a continuous foil, therefore, it is cut to the size as per<\/p>\n
     requirement of the      capacity of the packet in which the<\/p>\n
     cigarettes are to be packed. Thus, the cuts are given<\/p>\n
     horizontally and separate pieces of the foil are made. As soon<\/p>\n
     as the separate piece of the foil is made , a word ‘PULL’ is<\/p>\n
     embossed on it. Thereafter fixed number of 10 or 20 cigarettes<\/p>\n
     are wrapped in the foil and the said wrapped cigarettes are<\/p>\n
     inserted in the cigarettes packet. An aluminium foil being a<\/p>\n
     resistant to moisture is used as a protector for the cigarettes<\/p>\n
     and to keep them dry. The word ‘PULL’ is embossed with a<\/p>\n
     view to make it convenient for the user and to know from<\/p>\n
     which side a cigarette can be taken out. Thus, it shows that<\/p>\n
     cutting and embossing do not transform aluminium foil into a<\/p>\n
     distinct and identifiable commodity. That does not change the<\/p>\n
     nature and substance of the aluminium foil. It does not render<\/p>\n
                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                   Cexa 139.05
\n                                     9<\/span><\/p>\n
     any marketable value to that piece of paper. Cutting to the size<\/p>\n
     and embossing is only for making it usable for the purpose of<\/p>\n
     packing.\n<\/p>\n
     9           In Mafatlal Industries Limited Vs.Nadiad Nagar<\/p>\n
     Palika,2000(117) ELT 290 the Apex Court has observed that<\/p>\n
     cutting of 100 mtrs.cloth into small pieces does not bring any<\/p>\n
     different commercial commodity.\n<\/p>\n
                 In Collector of Central Excise Vs.Technoweld<\/p>\n
     Industries,2003 (155) ELT 2009 (S.C.)the Supreme Court has<\/p>\n
     dealt with the issue that drawing wires from wire rods is<\/p>\n
     manufacture or not and it is held that both the products being<\/p>\n
     wires are not considered excisable merely because they are<\/p>\n
     covered by two separate entries in the tariff.\n<\/p>\n
           In Parle Products Pvt.Ltd. Vs.Union of India , 1991<\/p>\n
     (56) E.L.T.52(Bom.) the Division Bench of this Court has<\/p>\n
     delt with a issue of use of aluminium foil with printed paper<\/p>\n
                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                  Cexa 139.05
\n                                   10<\/span><\/p>\n
     for packing whether amounts to manufacturing. In the said<\/p>\n
     case the Division Bench of this Court held that the<\/p>\n
     Department was clearly in error in recovering the duty from<\/p>\n
     the company. Backing of aluminium foil with printed paper<\/p>\n
     only to make it more attractive for packing and not resulting in<\/p>\n
     any distinct and different articles does not amount to<\/p>\n
     manufacture .\n<\/p>\n
     10          The present case in fact is covered by the ratio<\/p>\n
     Court in Commissioner of Central Excise New Delhi I<\/p>\n
     Vs.S.R.Tissues Pvt.Ltd.2005(186) E.L.T.(S.C.)in which the<\/p>\n
     Apex Court has observed that slitting\/cutting of jumbo rolls of<\/p>\n
     plain tissue paper\/aluminium foil is not treated as a<\/p>\n
     manufacture. Hence section 2(f) of the Act is not applicable.\n<\/p>\n
     In the said case jumbo rolls of toilet tissue papers or a<\/p>\n
     aluminium foils were cut in various shapes and sizes.\n<\/p>\n
     However, it was held that mere mention of the product in tariff<\/p>\n
     heading does not necessarily implies that the said product was<\/p>\n
                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                     Cexa 139.05
\n                                      11<\/span><\/p>\n
     obtained by process of manufacture. The submissions of<\/p>\n
     Mr.Rao that the present case is distinguishable from this case<\/p>\n
     (S.R.Tissues) is not correct and cannot be accepted. There is<\/p>\n
     nothing on record to suggest that the cut to shape\/embossed<\/p>\n
     aluminium foils used for packing cigarettes is a distinct<\/p>\n
     marketable commodity . Neither the appellant nor any one<\/p>\n
     else is said to have been marketing cut to shape\/embossed<\/p>\n
     aluminium foils.\n<\/p>\n
     11    Hence the view taken by the Asstt.Collector of Central<\/p>\n
     Excise as also the CESTAT that embossing on foil and cutting<\/p>\n
     to shape and size during the process of packing of cigarettes<\/p>\n
     cannot be faulted.     Aluminium foil           is cut to size in a<\/p>\n
     continuous process and it does emerge as a new commodity<\/p>\n
     and hence it is not excisable.\n<\/p>\n
     12    In these circumstances, the questions raised by the<\/p>\n
     revenue are answered in the affirmative, that is, in favour of<\/p>\n
                                           ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                  Cexa 139.05
\n                                   12<\/span><\/p>\n
     the assessee and against the revenue.\n<\/p>\n
           The appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
     (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)                    (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.)<\/p>\n
                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 16:49:18 :::<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011 Bench: J.P. Devadhar, Mridula Bhatkar Cexa 139.05 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.139\/2005 The Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-V, 5th Floor,Utpad Shulk Bhavan, Plot no.C-24, Sector-E, Bandra-Kurla […]<\/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":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-176961","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011 - 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\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-26T02:34:28+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\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\\\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-26T02:34:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1673,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011\",\"name\":\"The Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\\\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-26T02:34:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\\\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"The Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011 - 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\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-26T02:34:28+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\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011","datePublished":"2011-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-26T02:34:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011"},"wordCount":1673,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011","name":"The Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-26T02:34:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-gtc-industries-ltd-on-2-february-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\/S Gtc Industries Ltd on 2 February, 2011"}]},{"@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\/176961","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=176961"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/176961\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=176961"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=176961"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=176961"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}