{"id":177562,"date":"2003-01-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-01-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003"},"modified":"2019-03-10T04:47:36","modified_gmt":"2019-03-09T23:17:36","slug":"collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003","title":{"rendered":"Collector Of Central Excise, &#8230; vs M\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; &#8230; on 31 January, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Collector Of Central Excise, &#8230; vs M\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; &#8230; on 31 January, 2003<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S Hegde<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: N.Santosh Hegde, B.P.Singh.<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  9351-52 of 1995\n\nPETITIONER:\nCollector of Central Excise, Aurangabad.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nM\/s.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; Anr.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 31\/01\/2003\n\nBENCH:\nN.Santosh Hegde &amp; B.P.Singh.\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t\t\tJ U D G M E N T<br \/>\nSANTOSH HEGDE,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>These appeals arise out of a decision of the Customs, Excise<br \/>\n&amp; Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (the tribunal), wherein the<br \/>\ntribunal by a majority judgment held that the respondents are<br \/>\nentitled to the benefit of the exemption granted under Notification<br \/>\nNo.217\/85 as amended in regard to the parts of nozzle and nozzle<br \/>\nholders used by them in the manufacture of an internal combustion<br \/>\nengine (ICE  diesel oil operated).\n<\/p>\n<p>\tBefore the tribunal the issue arose in view of the stand taken<br \/>\nby the Department that the appellant is not entitled to the benefit of<br \/>\nthe said notification because the notification in question having not<br \/>\nexempted nozzle and nozzle holders, the respondent cannot claim<br \/>\nthe benefit of the said notification in respect of the parts of nozzle<br \/>\nand nozzle holders on the ground that they are used in the<br \/>\nmanufacture of original equipment viz. internal combustion<br \/>\nengines.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe Judicial Member agreed with the view of the<br \/>\nDepartment that since the notification in question specifically<br \/>\nexcluded the benefit of exemption to nozzle and nozzle holders,<br \/>\nthe respondent cannot claim the said benefit in regard to the parts<br \/>\nof such nozzle and nozzle holders even though they are used in the<br \/>\nmanufacture of diesel oil operated combustion engine, which the<br \/>\nrespondent manufactures; whereas the Technical Member in his<br \/>\ndiffering order came to the conclusion that the authorities of the<br \/>\nDepartment had taken an erroneous view that parts of nozzle and<br \/>\nnozzle holders are equivalent to nozzle and nozzle holders<br \/>\nthemselves. He also held that a part of nozzle and nozzle holder<br \/>\nwould become a nozzle and nozzle holder only after a series of<br \/>\nprocess of assembling involving land, labour and capital, therefore,<br \/>\nparts of nozzle and nozzle holders cannot be equated with nozzle<br \/>\nand nozzle holders themselves, and in view of the fact that the<br \/>\nnotification in question did not specifically exclude the parts of<br \/>\nnozzle and nozzle holders from the benefit of exemption, the said<br \/>\nlearned Member held that the respondent is entitled to the benefit<br \/>\nof exemption. Hence, he differed from the Judicial Member.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tConsequently, the issue was referred to a third Member who<br \/>\nframed the following points for consideration :\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case parts of<br \/>\nnozzle and nozzle holders are entitled to the benefit of notification<br \/>\n217\/85 (as amended), as held by the Technical Member.\n<\/p>\n<p>Or<\/p>\n<p>\tthey are not entitled to the benefit of the said notification<br \/>\nand matter requires to be remanded for considering the claim of<br \/>\nbenefit of notification 216\/87-CE dated 15.9.1987 and notification<br \/>\n112\/88-CE dated 1.3.1988, as held by the Judicial Member.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\tConsidering the said points, the third Member agreed with<br \/>\nthe Technical Member. While doing so, he held that parts of nozzle<br \/>\nand nozzle holders cannot be deemed to be nozzle and nozzle<br \/>\nholders which come into existence only as a result of series of<br \/>\nprocess of assembling of various parts. In coming to this<br \/>\nconclusion, the learned Member relied upon a judgment of this<br \/>\nCourt in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1348345\/\">Union of India v. M\/s. Tarachand Gupta &amp;<br \/>\nBros.<\/a> (1983 ELT 1456) wherein this Court considering the claim<br \/>\nof an importer who imported various parts of motorcycles in<br \/>\nknocked down condition, claimed the benefit of an import licence<br \/>\nissued to him for importing parts and accessories of motorcycles.<br \/>\nThe contention of the revenue in that case was that in reality these<br \/>\nparts were only knocked down parts of the motorcycles which<br \/>\ncould be re-assembled as motorcycle(s) after their import, hence,<br \/>\nthey were not entitled to import such knocked down parts of a<br \/>\nmotorcycle was rejected by this Court holding that since the<br \/>\nimporter had imported parts and accessories of mopeds, his<br \/>\nimports were covered by Entry No. 295 of the Schedule to the<br \/>\nImport Trade Control Order and it was not permissible for the<br \/>\nCollector to hold that they were not covered by Entry No. 295 on<br \/>\nthe ground that when assembled together they would constitute<br \/>\nother articles like a motorcycle, scooter etc. Following the said<br \/>\njudgment of this Court the third member agreed with the Technical<br \/>\nMember holding that subject to the fulfilment of other conditions<br \/>\nof the notification, parts of nozzle and nozzle holders are entitled<br \/>\nto the benefit of exemption under Notification No.217\/85, as<br \/>\namended. Thus, by a majority the tribunal held in favour of the<br \/>\nrespondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr. A K Ganguli, learned senior counsel appearing for the<br \/>\nDepartment before us, contended that when the notification<br \/>\nspecifically excludes the benefits of exemption to nozzle and<br \/>\nnozzle holders, it cannot be said that parts of such nozzle and<br \/>\nnozzle holders are not excluded by the said notification. He<br \/>\ncontended that ultimately it is these parts which constitute the<br \/>\nnozzle and nozzle holders which the exemption notification had<br \/>\nexcluded from its benefit, therefore, it cannot be said that part of a<br \/>\npart constituting a product, can be treated separately from the part<br \/>\nwhich is not exempted.\n<\/p>\n<p>Whereas Mr. Joseph Vellapally, learned senior counsel<br \/>\nappearing for the respondent, contended that the majority Members<br \/>\nwere justified in coming to the conclusion that nozzle and nozzle<br \/>\nholders are not the same as part of the said nozzle and nozzle<br \/>\nholders and the exemption notification not having specifically<br \/>\nexcluded these parts, it is not open to the Department to equate the<br \/>\nparts as being the same as nozzle and nozzle holders. He contends<br \/>\nthat ultimately these parts be it a part of nozzle or nozzle holders or<br \/>\nnot would become a part of the ultimate product that is the internal<br \/>\ncombustion engine, therefore, it would become a part of the engine<br \/>\nand not part of nozzle or nozzle holder on the principle &#8220;a part of a<br \/>\npart is a part of the whole&#8221;. That apart, learned counsel pointed out<br \/>\nto us that the Department itself has subsequently accepted the<br \/>\nverdict of the tribunal without any reservation as could be seen<br \/>\nfrom the application made to the Collector of Appeals under<br \/>\nSection 35E(4) of the Central Excises &amp; Salt Act, 1944 by the<br \/>\nAssistant Collector concerned on 24.9.1994. Learned counsel for<br \/>\nthe respondent pointed out that based on this application the<br \/>\nCollector of Central Excise &amp; Customs (Appeals), Pune, allowed<br \/>\nthe prayer of the said Assistant Collector and following the<br \/>\njudgment of this Court in the case of Kamlakshi Finance Corpn.<br \/>\nLtd. [1991 (55) ELT 453 (SC)] held in favour of the respondent by<br \/>\nholding that parts of the nozzle and nozzle holders are eligible for<br \/>\nthe benefit of exemption under Notification No.217\/85 subject to<br \/>\nfulfilment of other conditions of the notification. The said order of<br \/>\nthe Appellate Collector has become final and is being followed by<br \/>\nthe Department till date. Learned counsel also relied upon a Board<br \/>\nCircular No.14\/88 dated 26.5.1988 wherein it was held that in view<br \/>\nof the fact that the parts which go into the manufacture of<br \/>\ncomponent parts that are in turn used in the manufacture of diesel<br \/>\noil operated internal combustion engines, hence, would also be<br \/>\nentitled to exemption in terms of Notification No.217\/85 subject to<br \/>\nfulfilment of other conditions. Therefore, in view of the above the<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the respondent contends that the appeal of the<br \/>\nDepartment before us is an exercise in futility since the<br \/>\nDepartment has accepted the claim of the respondent knowing very<br \/>\nwell these appeals are pending and without making those orders<br \/>\nsubject to the judgment of this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWe find substantial force in the argument of the learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the respondent. It is true that the Department has<br \/>\nchallenged the finding of the majority members before us in these<br \/>\nappeals but as pointed out by the learned counsel for the<br \/>\nrespondent, the Department itself without reference to these<br \/>\nappeals decided to get the order which was in its favour, set aside<br \/>\nby invoking the provisions of Section 34E(4) of the Act, and<br \/>\nhaving obtained such an order from the Appellate Collector, we do<br \/>\nnot think it proper for the Department now to continue to agitate<br \/>\nthis issue. We may make it clear that neither the application under<br \/>\nSection 34E(4) of the Act filed by the Assistant Collector nor the<br \/>\norder made therein by the Appellate Collector are made subject to<br \/>\nthe decision of this Court. That apart, as pointed out by learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the respondent, the Board itself by its Circular referred<br \/>\nto hereinabove, has held that parts of nozzle and nozzle holders are<br \/>\nnot nozzle and nozzle holders for the purpose of the notification in<br \/>\nquestion so as to deny the benefit of exemption to those parts. We<br \/>\nare told that this decision of the Appellate Collector and that of the<br \/>\nBoard are being followed by the Department without demur. In the<br \/>\nsaid view of the matter we do not think it is necessary for us to go<br \/>\ninto the main question in regard to which there was difference of<br \/>\nopinion amongst the Members of the tribunal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFor the reasons stated above, these appeals fail and the same<br \/>\nare dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Collector Of Central Excise, &#8230; vs M\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; &#8230; on 31 January, 2003 Author: S Hegde Bench: N.Santosh Hegde, B.P.Singh. CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 9351-52 of 1995 PETITIONER: Collector of Central Excise, Aurangabad. RESPONDENT: M\/s.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; Anr. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 31\/01\/2003 BENCH: N.Santosh Hegde &amp; [&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-177562","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>Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; ... on 31 January, 2003 - 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\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; ... on 31 January, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003\" \/>\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=\"2003-01-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-09T23:17:36+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Collector Of Central Excise, &#8230; vs M\\\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; &#8230; on 31 January, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-01-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-09T23:17:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003\"},\"wordCount\":1531,\"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\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003\",\"name\":\"Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\\\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; ... on 31 January, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-01-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-09T23:17:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Collector Of Central Excise, &#8230; vs M\\\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; &#8230; on 31 January, 2003\"}]},{\"@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":"Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; ... on 31 January, 2003 - 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\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; ... on 31 January, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-01-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-09T23:17:36+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Collector Of Central Excise, &#8230; vs M\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; &#8230; on 31 January, 2003","datePublished":"2003-01-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-09T23:17:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003"},"wordCount":1531,"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\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003","name":"Collector Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; ... on 31 January, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-01-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-09T23:17:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-vs-ms-motor-industries-co-ltd-on-31-january-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Collector Of Central Excise, &#8230; vs M\/S.Motor Industries Co. Ltd. &amp; &#8230; on 31 January, 2003"}]},{"@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\/177562","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=177562"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177562\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=177562"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=177562"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=177562"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}