{"id":18031,"date":"2004-12-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-12-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004"},"modified":"2018-06-11T07:49:27","modified_gmt":"2018-06-11T02:19:27","slug":"ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004","title":{"rendered":"Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. &#8230; vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. &#8230; vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S.N. Variava, Dr. Ar. Lakshmanan, S.H. Kapadia<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  2431 of 1999\n\nPETITIONER:\nICHALKARANJI MACHINE CENTRE PVT. LIMITED.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 10\/12\/2004\n\nBENCH:\nS.N. VARIAVA &amp; DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN &amp; S.H. KAPADIA\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>2004 Supp(6) SCR 858<\/p>\n<p>The Judgment was delivered by HON&#8217;BLE JUSTICE KAPADIA<\/p>\n<p>This is an appeal by the assessee under section 35L(b) of the Central<br \/>\nExcises and Salt Act, 1944, against the final judgment and order No.<br \/>\nE\/1863\/98-B1 dated 17.8.1998 passed in Appeal No. E\/829\/92-B1 by the<br \/>\nCustoms Excise &amp; Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, imposing<br \/>\ninter alia duty amounting to Rs. 3.15 lacs and denying exemption under<br \/>\nnotification No. 175\/86\/CE dated 1.3.1986.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. Briefly stated, the facts are as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>The appellants are the manufacturers of components of machinery falling<br \/>\nunder chapter 9024.90. They also manufacture gear boxes and gear box covers<br \/>\nfalling under chapter 8483.00 of the schedule annexed to the Central Excise<br \/>\nTariff Act, 1985. In order to manufacture the aforestated items, the<br \/>\nappellants use iron and steel products falling under chapter 7209, 7203 and<br \/>\n7203.20 as inputs. The appellants are having permanent small scale industry<br \/>\nregistration granted by D.I.C. Kolhapur.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. Being a small scale industry, the appellants were entitled to the<br \/>\nbenefit of Central Excise Notification No. 175\/86-CE dated 1.3.1986.\n<\/p>\n<p>4. For the financial year 1986-87, the appellants had opted for the Modvat<br \/>\nScheme and took credit of input duty on iron and steel products falling<br \/>\nunder chapter 7209, 7203 and 7203.20 as inputs. They continued to avail the<br \/>\nmodvat facility for the next financial year 1987-88.\n<\/p>\n<p>5. On 5.4.1988, the appellants had filed classification list claiming<br \/>\nconcessional rate of duty w.e.f. 1.4.1988. This concessional rate of duty<br \/>\nwas 10% less of the effective rate, as provided for under part 1(a)(i) of<br \/>\nthe notification No. 175\/86\/CE dated 1.3.1986. On approval of the<br \/>\nclassification list, the appellants had cleared final products under sub-<br \/>\nheading 90.24 and under sub-heading 84.23, after paying duty at the<br \/>\neffective rate less 10%, as approved in their classification list.\n<\/p>\n<p>6. On 26.10.1990, a show-cause notice was issued to the appellants to show-<br \/>\ncause why differential duty of Rs. 3.15 lacs should not be recovered from<br \/>\nthem under Section 11A of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 read with rule<br \/>\n92 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 . By the said show cause notice, the<br \/>\nproviso to section 11A relating to the extended period for demanding excise<br \/>\nduty was invoked. By reply dated 24.2.1991, the appellants contended that<br \/>\nthey had not withdrawn their declaration filed under rule 57G, that the<br \/>\nassessment officer was aware that the appellants had not availed of the<br \/>\nmodvat credit during the financial year 1988-89 and, therefore, invocation<br \/>\nof the proviso to section 11A was improper and not justified.\n<\/p>\n<p>7. By order dated 16.12.1991, the Additional Collector of Central Excise<br \/>\nfound that the appellants had opted for the modvat scheme when it was<br \/>\nintroduced in 1987-88; that under the scheme, the appellants were required<br \/>\nto pay duty on steel bars (inputs) used in the manufacture of gear boxes<br \/>\nand gear box covers (final products) for taking modvat credit; that the<br \/>\nappellants falsely made the department believe of having taken the modvat<br \/>\ncredit on inputs by not withdrawing the declaration filed earlier under<br \/>\nrule 57G; that the appellants cleared the final products by payment of duty<br \/>\nat concessional rate which they were not entitled to do as the final<br \/>\nproducts were made from items which were exempted under relevant<br \/>\nnotifications and in the circumstances, the Additional Collector imposed<br \/>\nthe differential duty of Rs. 3.15 lacs with penalty of Rs. 30,000\/- on the<br \/>\nassessees. By the said order dated 16.12.1991, the Additional Collector<br \/>\nconfiscated the goods subject to redemption on payment of fine of Rs.<br \/>\n10,000\/-.\n<\/p>\n<p>8. Being aggrieved, the appellants preferred appeal bearing no. E\/829\/92-B1<br \/>\nbefore the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi<br \/>\n(hereinafter referred to as &#8216;the Tribunal). By impugned judgment and order<br \/>\ndated 17.9.1998, the Tribunal found that the appellants had received cast<br \/>\niron and castings (inputs) in their factory, which were exempt from duty<br \/>\nand consequently, it was impermissible for the appellants to take modvat<br \/>\ncredit in respect thereof. That, as regards the steel bars, which were used<br \/>\nas inputs by the appellants, the Tribunal found that the appellants had<br \/>\ntaken the benefit of concessional exemption without taking the modvat<br \/>\ncredit and utilizing it in the payment of duty on the final products. In<br \/>\nthe circumstances, the Tribunal found that the appellants had wrongly<br \/>\ncleared the final products by paying concessional rate of duty in breach of<br \/>\nthe conditions in the notification No. 175\/86 \/ CE dated 1.3.1986 (as<br \/>\namended). The Tribunal further found that the appellants had wilfully<br \/>\nsuppressed above facts to enable their customers, who were their sister<br \/>\nconcern, to take higher credit of duty in respect of the final products of<br \/>\nthe appellants, which the sister concern used as its inputs. Under the<br \/>\nabove circumstances, the Tribunal refused to interfere with the order<br \/>\npassed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise, on 16.12.1991.\n<\/p>\n<p>9. Modvat is basically a duty -collecting procedure, which aims at allowing<br \/>\nrelief to a manufacturer on the duty element borne by him in respect of the<br \/>\ninputs used by him. It was introduced w.e.f. 1.3.1986. The said scheme was<br \/>\nregulated under rules 57A to 57J of Central Excise Rules, 1944. Rule 57A<br \/>\nentitled a manufacturer to take instant credit of the central excise duty<br \/>\npaid on the inputs used by him in the manufacture of the finished product,<br \/>\nprovided that the input and the finished product were excisable commodities<br \/>\nand fell under any of the specified chapters in the tariff schedule. Under<br \/>\nrule 57G, every manufacturer was required to file a declaration before the<br \/>\njurisdictional Assistant Collector, declaring his intention to take modvat<br \/>\ncredit after paying duty on the inputs. The object behind rule 57A read<br \/>\nwith rule 57G and rule 57-I was utilization of credit allowed towards<br \/>\npayment of duty on any of the final products in relation to manufacture of<br \/>\nwhich such inputs were intended to be used in accordance with the<br \/>\ndeclaration under rule 57G. Rule 57-I referred to consequences of taking<br \/>\ncredit wrongly.\n<\/p>\n<p>10. The object of the modvat scheme was to reduce cost of final product by<br \/>\ntaking credit for the duty paid on the inputs.\n<\/p>\n<p>11. The short point which arises for determination in the present case is &#8211;<br \/>\nwhether the appellants went on paying concessional rate of duty wilfully<br \/>\nwithout availing of modvat credit with intent to misutilize the modvat<br \/>\nscheme?\n<\/p>\n<p>12. In order to answer the aforestated point, we reproduce hereinblow the<br \/>\nrelevant part of notification No. 175\/86\/CE dated 1.3.1986, as amended:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of rule 8 of the<br \/>\nCentral Excise Rules, 1944, and in supersession of the notification of the<br \/>\nGovernment of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No.<br \/>\n85\/85-Central Excises, dated the 17th March, 1985, the Central Government<br \/>\nhereby exempts the excisable goods of the description specified in the<br \/>\nAnnexure below and falling under the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff<br \/>\nAct, 1985 (5 of 1986) (hereinafter referred to as the &#8216;specified goods&#8217;)<br \/>\nand cleared for home consumption on or after the Ist day of April in any<br \/>\nfinancial year, by a manufacturer from one or more factories &#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>(a) in the case of first clearances of the specified goods up to an<br \/>\naggregate value not exceeding rupees thirty lakhs &#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>(i) in a case where a manufacturer avails of the credit of the duty paid on<br \/>\ninputs used in the manufacture of the specified goods cleared for home<br \/>\nconsumption under rule 57A of the said Rules or sub-section (1) of section<br \/>\n5A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944<\/p>\n<p>(ii) in any other case from the whole of the duty of excise leviable<br \/>\nthereon:\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided that the aggregate value of clearances of the specified goods<br \/>\nunder sub-clause (ii) of this clause in respect of any one Chapter of the<br \/>\nsaid Schedule, shall not exceed rupees fifteen lakhs;\n<\/p>\n<p>(b) in the case of clearances (being the clearances of the specified goods<br \/>\nof an aggregate value not exceeding rupees sixty lakhs) immediately<br \/>\nfollowing the said clearances of the value specified in clause (a) from so<br \/>\nmuch of the duty of excise leviable thereon which is specified in the said<br \/>\nSchedule read with any relevant notification issued under sub-rule (1) of<br \/>\nrule 8 of the said Rules or sub-section (1) of section 5A of the Central<br \/>\nExcises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) as is equivalent to an amount<br \/>\ncalculated at the rate of 10 per cent ad valorem;\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided that the amount of duty of excise payable on the specified goods<br \/>\nunder sub-clause (i) of clause (a), or as the case may be, under this<br \/>\nclause, shall not be less than an amount calculated at the rate of 5 per<br \/>\ncent ad valorem;\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided further that the aggregate value of clearances of the specified<br \/>\ngoods in terms of clause (a) and clause (b) of this paragraph taken<br \/>\ntogether, shall not exceed rupees seventy-five lakhs.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>13. The above notification envisaged total and partial exemption; it also<br \/>\ncategorized the clearances into first clearances and subsequent clearances;<br \/>\nit also categorized manufacturers; into those who took modvat credit and<br \/>\nthose who did not. Those who took modvat credit were entitled to only<br \/>\nconcessional exemption, while those who did not avail of modvat credit were<br \/>\nentitled to total exemption up to a specified limit. While individual<br \/>\nceiling limits on clearances were prescribed, there was an aggregate<br \/>\nceiling limit of Rs. 75 lacs, beyond which normal duty was payable.<br \/>\nTherefore, if a manufacturer effected first clearances of specified goods<br \/>\nup to Rs. 30 lacs, he could avail the concession on such clearances, but in<br \/>\nrespect of subsequent clearances, he will get the concession only up to Rs.<br \/>\n45 lacs. The basic point is that those who avail of modvat credit were<br \/>\nentitled to concessional exemption only, while those who did not avail such<br \/>\ncredit could get total exemption up to a specified limit of Rs. 15 lacs (as<br \/>\nit stood at the relevant time). Under para (a)(i) of the notification,<br \/>\nconcession was not admissible where modvat credit was not<br \/>\navailed\/admissible.\n<\/p>\n<p>14. In the present case, as found by the Adjudicating Authority and the<br \/>\nTribunal, modvat credit was not availed \/ admissible. In respect of cast<br \/>\niron and castings, modvat credit was inadmissible as both these inputs were<br \/>\nexempted, whereas in case of steel bars, the manufacturer did not avail of<br \/>\nmodvat credit. Therefore, the appellants were not entitled to clear the<br \/>\nfinal products at concessional rate of duty. Lastly, without reversing the<br \/>\ncredit, the appellants cleared the final products at the concessional rate<br \/>\nof duty, in breach of the above notification, in favour of their sister<br \/>\nconcern and consequently, the said sister concern was not entitled to the<br \/>\nbenefit of higher credit which was admissible to manufacturers who bought<br \/>\ngoods as their inputs from small scale industrial units (appellants<br \/>\nherein).\n<\/p>\n<p>15. It was argued on behalf of the appellants that they had availed of the<br \/>\nmodvat credit as they had not withdrawn the declaration filed by them with<br \/>\nthe department. That, there was no wilful supersession as the department<br \/>\nwas aware, on the basis of their accounts, about the appellants not<br \/>\navailing the modvat credit and, therefore, the department had erred in<br \/>\ninvoking the proviso to section 11A in relation to the extended period for<br \/>\ndemanding excise duty. We do not find merit in the above arguments. The<br \/>\nappellants never opted out of the modvat scheme. They partly cleared the<br \/>\nfinal products by paying duty at concessonal rate without utilizing the<br \/>\ncredit in the payment of duty on final product and partly on the basis of<br \/>\ncredit which was not admissible. It is important to note that the<br \/>\nunderlying object behind the notification was to utilize the credit against<br \/>\npayment of duty on the final product. In the circumstances, the demand for<br \/>\ndifferential duty, penalty and confiscation subject to payment of<br \/>\nredemption fine is valid and justified.\n<\/p>\n<p>16. Accordingly, we answer the above question in the affirmative i.e. in<br \/>\nfavour of the department and against the appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p>17. Before concluding, we may clarify that our judgment is confined to the<br \/>\nnotification No. 175\/86\/CE, as it stood at the relevant time.\n<\/p>\n<p>18. For the aforestated reasons, we do not find any reason to interfere in<br \/>\nthis appeal, which is, accordingly, dismissed, with no order as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. &#8230; vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004 Bench: S.N. Variava, Dr. Ar. Lakshmanan, S.H. Kapadia CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 2431 of 1999 PETITIONER: ICHALKARANJI MACHINE CENTRE PVT. LIMITED. RESPONDENT: COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10\/12\/2004 BENCH: S.N. VARIAVA &amp; DR. [&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-18031","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>Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. ... vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004 - 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\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. ... vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004\" \/>\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=\"2004-12-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-11T02:19:27+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. &#8230; vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-12-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-11T02:19:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004\"},\"wordCount\":2020,\"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\\\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004\",\"name\":\"Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. ... vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-12-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-11T02:19:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. &#8230; vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004\"}]},{\"@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":"Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. ... vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004 - 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\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. ... vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-12-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-11T02:19:27+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. &#8230; vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004","datePublished":"2004-12-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-11T02:19:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004"},"wordCount":2020,"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\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004","name":"Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. ... vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-12-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-11T02:19:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ichalkaranji-machine-centre-pvt-vs-collector-of-central-excise-pune-on-10-december-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ichalkaranji Machine Centre Pvt. &#8230; vs Collector Of Central Excise, Pune on 10 December, 2004"}]},{"@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\/18031","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=18031"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18031\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18031"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=18031"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=18031"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}