{"id":258221,"date":"1990-09-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1990-09-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990"},"modified":"2017-06-27T10:23:26","modified_gmt":"2017-06-27T04:53:26","slug":"samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990","title":{"rendered":"Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise … on 21 September, 1990"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise … on 21 September, 1990<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1991 AIR 369, 1990 SCR Supl. (2)\t1<\/div>\n
Author: M Fathima Beevi<\/div>\n
Bench: Fathima Beevi, M. (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nSAMRAT INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE HYDERABAD\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT21\/09\/1990\n\nBENCH:\nFATHIMA BEEVI, M. (J)\nBENCH:\nFATHIMA BEEVI, M. (J)\nRANGNATHAN, S.\n\nCITATION:\n 1991 AIR  369\t\t  1990 SCR  Supl. (2)\t1\n 1992 SCC  Supl.  (1) 293 JT 1991 (1)\t181\n 1990 SCALE  (2)747\n\n\nACT:\n    Central Excises and Salt Act<\/a>, 1944: Section 11-B<\/a> Central\nExcise\tand  Salt  Rules, 1944: Rules 173 B, C,\t CC,  D\t and\nI--Assessee    clearing\t  goods\t  under\t   'Self    Removal'\nprocedure--Application\t  claiming    refund\tof    excess\nduty--Starting point for period of limitation-- What is.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     The  appellant  was  manufacturing\t Hacksaw  blades  and\nBandsaw\t falling under Tariff Item No. 51-A(iv) of the\tCen-\ntral Excise Tariff. On 26.3.1985 they filed a classification\nlist as per Rule 173 B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944  in\nrespect of their products furnishing the tariff rate of\t 15%\nAd  valorem by mistake instead of furnishing  the  effective\nrates  of  duty\t as  per  Notification\tNo.85\/85  CE   dated\n17.3.1985.  The\t Assistant Collector of Central\t Excise\t ap-\nproved\tthe classification list on 3.6.1985.  On  31.10.1985\nthe  appellant filed a revised classification list with\t the\neffective  rates of its products with  retrospective  effect\nfrom  26.3.1985\t which was also approved  by  the  Assistant\nCollector  of  Central Excise. On 30.10.1985  the  appellant\nmade an application under section 11B<\/a> of the Central Excises\nand  Salt Act<\/a>, 1944 for refund of excise duty claiming\tthat\nthey had paid excess excise duty from 1.4.1985 to 31.8.1985.\nBy  its\t order dated 13.12.1985 the Assistant  Collector  of\nCentral\t Excise allowed the claim only partly  but  rejected\nthe  claim for the period from 1.4.1985 to 27.4.1985 on\t the\nground\tthat the claim was barred under section 11B<\/a>  of\t the\nAct because the 'relevant date' for preferring the claim for\nthe  appellant was the date of payment of duty and the\tduty\nhad  been paid by adjustment in the personal ledger  account\nas and when goods were removed;\n    The\t order of the Assistant Collector was  confirmed  in\nthe appeal by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals).\n    Appellant's\t further  appeal to the Customs\t Excise\t and\nGold (Control) Appellate Tribunal was also unsuccessful.\n    In appeal to this Court under section 35L<\/a> of the Central\nExcises and Salt Act<\/a>, 1944 it was contended on behalf of the\nappellant  (i)\tthat mere debiting in  the  personal  ledger\naccount should not be taken as the\n2\nstarting point for limitation and the, relevant date  should\nbe  the date on which ART-12 Returns, which were filed on  a\nmonthly\t basis, were assessed: and (ii) that clause  (e)  of\nExplanation to Section 11<\/a> (B) was applicable to the case.\nAllowing the appeal, this Court,\n    HELD:  1. The scheme for payment of duty of goods  under\nwhich  the  appellant  was clearing his goods  is  known  as\n'self-removal'\tprocedure.  There will be no  time  bar\t for\nrefund\tif the duty is paid under protest. The period  of  6\nmonths is prescribed in other cases. [6H; 7A]\n    2. In the instant case, the classification list filed by\nthe  appellant for the period 1.4.1985 to 27.4.1985 was\t not\napproved  till 3.6.85. From provisions of Rules\t 173B,\t173C\nand 173CC of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 it is clear that\nclearances  can be made only after the approval of the\tlist\nby the particular officer. However, if there is likely to be\ndelay in accordance with the approval the officer can  allow\nthe  assessee to avail himself of the  procedure  prescribed\nunder  Rule 9B for provisional assessment of goods.  Between\n1st  April, 1975 when the classification list was filed\t and\n3rd June, 1985 when the list was approved, the assessee\t was\nclearing  the  goods  by determining the  duty\thimself\t and\ndebiting the amount of duty in his personal ledger  account.\nThe amount of duty paid by him was obviously provisional and\nsubject\t to the result of the final approval by the  officer\nconcerned.  In these circumstances, the clearance  of  goods\nmade  by  the appellant between 1st April and 3rd  of  June,\n1985  were in accordance with the procedure for\t provisional\nassessment.   In such a situation clause (e) of para (B)  of\nthe  Explanation under section 11<\/a> B will be  attracted.\t The\nRT-12  Return  for  the month of April, 1985  was  filed  on\n8.5.1985  and the same was assessed on\t29.10.1985.  It\t is,\ntherefore,  only from the date of this assessment that\ttime\nbar  in\t section 11<\/a> B will operate. The\t refund\t application\nhaving\tbeen filed on 30th October, 1985 cannot,  therefore,\nsaid to be time barred. [7B-D; E-F]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
    CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4460  Of
\n1988.\n<\/p>\n
    From  the Order dated 15.4. 1988 of the  Customs  Excise
\nand  Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal New Delhi  in  Appeal
\nNo. E\/Appeal No. 2225 of 1986-A.\n<\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
V.  Sreedharan, V.J. Francis and N.M. Popli for\t the  Appel-
\nlant.\n<\/p>\n
    Ashok  H. Desai, Solicitor General, Dalip Tandon and  P.
\nParmeshwaran for the Respondent.\n<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n    FATHIMA BEEVI, J. This is an appeal under section 35L<\/a> of
\nthe  Central Excises and Salt Act<\/a>, 1944. The appeal  is\t di-
\nrected\tagainst\t the order dated 15.4.1988  of\tthe  Customs
\nExcise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The
\nappellant is the manufacturer of Hacksaw blades and  Bandsaw
\nBlades failing under Tariff Item No. 51-A(iv) of the Central
\nExcise Tariff. The appellant filed a classification list  as
\nper Rule 173B of the Central Excise Rules 1944 on  26.3.1985
\nin  respect of their products furnishing the tariff rate  of
\n15%  Ad valorem by mistake instead of furnishing the  effec-
\ntive  rates  of duty as per Notification No.85\/85  CE  dated
\n17.3.1985.  The\t aggregate  value of the  clearance  in\t the
\npreceding  year i.e. 1984-85 did not exceed Rs.75 lakhs.  In
\nthe  case  of first clearance upto an  aggregate  value\t not
\nexceeding  Rs.7.5 lakhs, the effective rates of duty is\t nil
\nand in the case of next clearance of Rs.7.5 lakhs, the\tduty
\nis  3.75%  Ad valorem. The Assistant  Collector\t of  Central
\nExcise,\t Hyderabad, approved the Tariff rate 15% Ad  valorem
\non  3.6.1985  instead of the above effective  rates  as\t the
\nappellant  did not claim the exemption as  per\tNotification
\nNo.85\/85  CE  dated 17.3.1985 due to  ignorance.  A  revised
\nclassification\tlist with the effective rates in respect  of
\nthe  products with retrospective effect from  26.3.1985\t was
\nfiled  on  31.10.1985. The revised classification  list\t was
\napproved.  The appellant claimed that they had\tpaid  excess
\nRs.2,55,172.55\tfrom 1.4.1985 to 31.8.1985 as  excise  duty.
\nThey  made an application for refund as per rule under\tsec-
\ntion  11B  of  the Central Excises and\tSalt  Act<\/a>,  1944  on
\n30.10.1985.\n<\/p>\n
    The\t Assistant Collector of Central Excise by his  order
\ndated  13.12.1985 sanctioned the refund claim  only  partly.
\nFor the period from 1.4.1985 to 27.4.1985, the refund  claim
\nwas  rejected on the ground that the same was  time  barred.
\nThe  Assistant Collector held that the refund claim for\t the
\nperiod 1.4.1985 to 27.4.1985 was time barred for the  reason
\nthat  under section 11B<\/a>, the ‘relevant date’ for  preferring
\nthe  claim for a case such as that of the appellant was\t the
\ndate of payment of duty and, according to him, the duty\t had
\nbeen  paid by adjustment in the personal ledger\t account  as
\nand  when goods were removed. The plea of the  appellant  is
\nthat mere debiting in the personal ledger account should not
\nbe taken as the starting point for
\n4<\/span>
\nlimitation and the relevant date should be the date on which
\nRT-12  Returns\twhich are filed on a monthly basis  are\t as-
\nsessed.\t The order of the Assistant Collector was  confirmed
\nin the appeal by the Collector of Central Excise  (Appeals).
\nThe further appeal to the Tribunal was also unsuccessful.
\n    The\t question that arises for decision in the appeal  is
\nas to the starting point of limitation for filing an  appli-
\ncation\tunder  section 11B<\/a> of the Central Excises  and\tSalt
\nAct<\/a>,  1944.  Section 11B<\/a> so far as it is material  reads  as
\nunder:\n<\/p>\n
“11B.  Claim  for refund of duty–(1)  Any  person  claiming
\nrefund\tof  any duty of excise may make an  application\t for
\nrefund\tof such duty to the Assistant Collector\t of  Central
\nExcise\tbefore\tthe expiry of six months from  the  relevant
\ndate.\n<\/p>\n
\t  Provided  that the limitation of six months  shall
\nnot apply where any duty has been paid under protest.
\nExplanation–For the purposes of this section
\n(B) “relevant date” means,–\n<\/p>\n
(a) to (d)  …………………………………….\n<\/p>\n
(e)  in\t a case where duty of excise is\t paid  provisionally
\nunder  this  Act or the rules made thereunder, the  date  of
\nadjustment of duty after the final assessment thereof;\n<\/p>\n
(f) in any other case, the date of payment of duty.”\n<\/p>\n
    The\t appellant’s contention before the  authorities\t was
\nthat the date of assessment would be the date-of payment  of
\nduty  within the meaning of clause (f) above. We agree\twith
\nthe  learned  Solicitor General that this  argument  is\t not
\ntenable.  Where\t an  assessee maintains\t a  personal  ledger
\naccount,  duty is paid by way of debit therein and  goes  to
\nreduce the amount of deposit paid by the assessee. It is
\n5<\/span>
\nnot a mere adjustment entry; it is effective payment.
\n    Before us, however, learned counsel for the assessee has
\nraised an alternative contention. According to the appellant
\nit is clause (e) which is applicable in the case whereas the
\ncontention of the respondent is that clause (f) is  attract-
\ned. To understand this argument, it is necessary to refer to
\n‘Self-removal’\tprocedure under which the appellant  cleared
\nthe goods.\n<\/p>\n
    Chapter VII-A of the Rules relates to removal of  excise
\ngoods  on determination of duty by producers,  manufacturers
\nof  private  warehouse\tlicensees. Under  Rule\t173B,  every
\nassessee  shall file with the Proper Officer for approval  a
\nlist  in  prescribed form showing full\tdescription  of\t all
\nexcisable  goods or products manufactured, the rate of\tduty
\nleviable  on  such goods and such other particulars  as\t the
\nCollector  may direct. The Proper Officer shall, after\tsuch
\nenquiry as he deems fit, approve the list with such  modifi-
\ncations\t as are considered necessary and return one copy  of
\nthe approved list to the assessee who shall unless otherwise
\ndirected by the Proper Officer determine the duty payable on
\nthe  goods  intended to be removed in accordance  with\tsuch
\nlist. All clearance shall be made only after the approval of
\nthe list by the Proper Officer. Sub-rule (2-A) of Rule\t173B
\nprovides as under:\n<\/p>\n
“(2-A)\tAll clearances shall, subject to the  provisions  of
\nrule  173CC, be made only after the approval of the list  by
\nthe proper officer. If the proper officer is of the  opinion
\nthat  on account of any inquiry to be made in the matter  or
\nfor  any  other reason to be recorded in  writing  there  is
\nlikely\tto  be delay in according the  approval,  he  shall,
\neither\ton a written request made by the assessee or on\t his
\nown  accord,  allow such assessee to avail  himself  of\t the
\nprocedure  prescribed under rule 9B for provisional  assess-
\nment of the goods.”\n<\/p>\n
     Where  the assessee disputes rate of duty\tapproved  by
\nthe Proper Officer in respect of goods, he may have to\tgive
\nan intimation to that effect to such officer and to pay duty
\nunder protest at the rate approved by such officer. When the
\ndispute about the rate of duty has been finalised or for any
\nother reason affecting rates of duty, a modification of\t the
\nrate  or rates of duty is necessitated, the  Proper  Officer
\nshall make such modification and inform the assessee accord-
\ningly.\tUnder  Rule 173C, the assessee shall file  with\t the
\nProper\tOfficer a price list in prescribed form.  Prior\t ap-
\nproval of the price list by the
\n6<\/span>
\nProper\tOfficer\t is necessary in the specified\tcases.\tHere
\nalso, sub-rule (5) of rule 173C provides:\n<\/p>\n
“(5)  Subject to the provisions of rule 173CC,\tan  assessee
\nspecified  in sub-rule (2) shall not clear any goods from  a
\nfactory, warehouse or other approved place of storage unless
\nthe  price list has been approved by the proper officer.  In
\ncase the proper officer is of the opinion that on account of
\nany  enquiry to be made in the matter or for any other\trea-
\nsons to be recorded in writing, there is likely to be  delay
\nin according approval, he shall either on a written  request
\nmade by the assessee or of his own accord allow such  asses-
\nsee to avail himself of the procedure prescribed under\trule
\n9B for provisional assessment of the goods.”\n<\/p>\n
    Under  Rule 173CC, assessee may remove goods in  certain
\ncases pending approval by the Proper Officer of the  classi-
\nfication  or price list. Rule 173F provides that  where\t the
\nassessee  has  complied with the provisions of\tRules  173B,
\n173D,  and  where applicable 173C, 173CC, he  shall  himself
\ndetermine  his liability for the duty due on  the  excisable
\ngoods intended to be removed and shall not, except as other-
\nwise  expressly\t provided, remove such goods unless  he\t has
\npaid the duty as determined. Under Rule 173G, every assessee
\nshall keep an account current with the Collector. This\trule
\nlays  down  the\t procedure which is to be  followed  by\t the
\nassessee  for payment of duty. According to sub-rule (3)  of
\nRule  173G, within five days after the close of\t each  month
\nevery assessee shall file with the Proper Officer a  monthly
\nreturn\tin the prescribed form showing the quantity  of\t the
\nexcisable goods manufactured, duty paid on such quantity and
\nother particulars. The Proper Officer makes an assessment as
\nprovided  under\t Rule 1731 on the basis of  the\t information
\ncontained in the return and after such further enquiry as he
\nmay  consider  necessary assess the duty due  on  the  goods
\nremoved and the assessment is completed. The duty determined
\nand  paid by the assessee under Rule 173F shall be  adjusted
\nagainst the duty assessed and where the duty so assessed  is
\nmore  than the duty determined and paid, the assessee  shall
\npay the deficiency by making a debit in the current  account
\nwithin\t10  days of the receipt of copy of  the\t return\t and
\nwhere  such duty is less, the assessee shall take credit  in
\nthe account current for the excess.\n<\/p>\n
    This is the scheme for the payment of duty for clearance
\nof  goods by the manufacturers. This procedure is  known  as
\nself-removal procedure. There will be no time bar for refund
\nif the duty is paid under
\n7<\/span>
\nprotest.  The  period  of 6 months is  prescribed  in  other
\ncases.\tAs we have already seen, section 1<\/a> 1B<\/a> says that\t the
\nperiod\tof 6 months “in a case where duty of excise is\tpaid
\nprovisionally  under this Act or the rules made\t thereunder,
\nthe  date of adjustment of duty after the  final  assessment
\nthereof”. In this case, the classification list filed by the
\nappellant  for\tthe  period 1.4.1985 to\t 27.4.1985  was\t not
\napproved  till 3.6.1985. From the provisions of Rules  173B,
\n173C  and 173CC, which we have set out earlier, it  will  be
\nseen that clearances can be made only after the approval  of
\nthe  list  by the particular officer. However, if  there  is
\nlikely to be delay in according the approval the officer can
\nallow  the assessee to avail himself of the  procedure\tpre-
\nscribed\t under\tRule 9B for provisional\t assessment  of\t the
\ngoods. In the present case between 1st April, 1975 when\t the
\nclassification\tlist was filed and 3rd June, 1985  when\t the
\nlist  was approved, the assessee was clearing the  goods  by
\ndetermining the duty himself and debiting the amount of duty
\nin  his personal ledger account. The amount of duty paid  by
\nhim  was obviously provisional and subject to the result  of
\nthe  final  approval by the officer concerned. This  is\t the
\nprocedure  prescribed under Rule 9B except for\tthe  circum-
\nstance that no bond as provided in Rule 9B is required in  a
\ncase where the personal ledger account is maintained for the
\nclearance  of the goods, since there is always a balance  in
\nthe account current sufficient to cover the duty that may be
\ndemanded on the goods intended to be removed at any time. In
\nthese  circumstances,  the clearances of goods made  by\t the
\nappellant  between 1st April and 3rd of June, 1985  were  in
\naccordance with the procedure for provisional assessment. In
\nsuch  a situation clause (e) of para (B) of the\t Explanation
\nunder section 11B<\/a> will be attracted. In this case the RT- 12
\nReturns\t for the month of April, 1985 was filed on  8.5.1985
\nand  the same was assessed on 29.10.1985. It is,  therefore,
\nonly  from  the\t date of this assessment that  time  bar  in
\nsection\t 11B<\/a>  will operate. In the present case\t the  refund
\napplication had been filed on the 30th of October, 1985.  It
\ncannot, therefore, said to be time barred.
\n    We, therefore, accept this contention of the  appellant.
\nThe appeal has therefore to be allowed holding the appellant
\nis entitled to the full amount and there is no bar of  limi-
\ntation\tas found by the Tribunal. We, therefore,  allow\t the
\nappeal.\t In  the facts and circumstances of the\t case  there
\nwill be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
T.N.A.\t\t\t\t    Appeal allowed.\n8<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise … on 21 September, 1990 Equivalent citations: 1991 AIR 369, 1990 SCR Supl. (2) 1 Author: M Fathima Beevi Bench: Fathima Beevi, M. (J) PETITIONER: SAMRAT INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD. Vs. RESPONDENT: COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE HYDERABAD DATE OF JUDGMENT21\/09\/1990 BENCH: FATHIMA BEEVI, […]<\/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-258221","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nSamrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise ... on 21 September, 1990 - 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\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise ... on 21 September, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990\" \/>\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=\"1990-09-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-27T04:53:26+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=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise … on 21 September, 1990\",\"datePublished\":\"1990-09-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-27T04:53:26+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990\"},\"wordCount\":2073,\"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\\\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990\",\"name\":\"Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise ... on 21 September, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1990-09-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-27T04:53:26+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise … on 21 September, 1990\"}]},{\"@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":"Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise ... on 21 September, 1990 - 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\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise ... on 21 September, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1990-09-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-06-27T04:53:26+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":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise … on 21 September, 1990","datePublished":"1990-09-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-27T04:53:26+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990"},"wordCount":2073,"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\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990","name":"Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise ... on 21 September, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1990-09-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-27T04:53:26+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/samrat-international-p-ltd-vs-collector-of-central-excise-on-21-september-1990#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Samrat International (P) Ltd vs Collector Of Central Excise … on 21 September, 1990"}]},{"@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\/258221","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=258221"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/258221\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=258221"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=258221"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=258221"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}