{"id":8434,"date":"2007-09-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-09-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007"},"modified":"2017-10-29T21:53:20","modified_gmt":"2017-10-29T16:23:20","slug":"commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007","title":{"rendered":"Commissioner Of Central Excise, … vs M\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Commissioner Of Central Excise, … vs M\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007<\/div>\n
Author: Kapadia<\/div>\n
Bench: S. H. Kapadia, B. Sudershan Reddy<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  1825-1827 of 2002\n\nPETITIONER:\nCommissioner of Central Excise, Delhi\n\nRESPONDENT:\nM\/s. Frick India Ltd. & Another\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 21\/09\/2007\n\nBENCH:\nS. H. Kapadia & B. Sudershan Reddy\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n
KAPADIA, J.\n<\/p>\n
1.\tThese civil appeals are filed by the Department under
\nSection 35-L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against order
\npassed by CEGAT dated 18.9.2001 in Final Order No.354-
\n356\/2000-A, in Appeal Nos.E\/1151 and 1192\/2000-A,
\nE\/3402\/2000-A whereby the Tribunal allowed the appeals
\nfiled by the assessee (respondents).\n<\/p>\n
2.\tAssessee-M\/s. Frick India Ltd., Faridabad, (M\/s. FIL)
\nmanufactures air-conditioning and refrigerating machinery
\nand appliances classifiable under Chapter 84 of the Central
\nExcise Tariff Act, 1985.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tAssessee cleared compressors falling under tariff sub-
\nheading 8414.10.  They also cleared to its buyers separately
\n“fly wheel” under separate tariff sub-heading 8483.00, “safety
\nvalve” under separate tariff sub-heading 8481.80 and “filter”
\nunder separate tariff sub-heading 8421.00.  Apart from the
\nabove three items, assessee supplied to its buyers bought-out
\nitems, namely, V. belt, motor, pulley, belt guard, gauge, gauge
\nboard, angle valve, M.S. male flange, C.A.F. Gasket, set of
\ntools, bolts and nuts, etc.<\/p>\n
4.\tOn 4.9.98, show cause notice was given to M\/s. FIL in
\nwhich it was alleged by the Department that the assessee had
\nevaded payment of duty on the full value of the compressors,
\nmanufactured and cleared by them, by separately invoicing
\nclearance of bought-out items and manufactured items.  At
\nthis stage, it may be noticed that the factory of the assessee is
\nin Faridabad where the items, manufactured and cleared,
\nconsisted of compressor, fly wheel, safety valve and filter
\n(“manufactured items”, for short) whereas from their trading
\noffice in New Delhi, the bought-out items consisted of V. belt,
\npulley, belt guard, angle valves and other items referred to in
\npara 3 of the show cause notice (“bought-out items”, for short).
\nAccording to the show cause notice, assessee had knowingly
\ncleared manufactured items and bought-out items separately;
\nthat the value of the bought-out items and manufactured
\nitems like fly wheel, safety valve and filter were includible in
\nthe assessable value of the compressor as without the said
\nitems the compressor was non-functional; that, M\/s. FIL had
\ndeliberately undervalued the compressor and overvalued the
\naccessories\/parts which were supplied separately to the
\nbuyers; that, there was a difference between the cost price and
\nthe declared assessable value for compressor and in the
\ncircumstances the assessee became liable to pay differential
\nduty amounting to Rs.4,46,19,392.65 on the accessories
\nwhich stood worked out on the basis of includibility of the
\nvalue of bought-out items + duty on the parts of accessories,
\nmanufactured and cleared by the assessee, at lower rate of
\nduty during the period August 1993 to March 1998.
\nAccording to the Department, the said accessories were in
\neffect parts of the compressor as the compressor was non-
\nfunctional without the said items.\n<\/p>\n
5.\tIn reply to the show cause notice, assessee pleaded that
\nwhen the manufactured items, namely, fly wheel, safety valve
\nand filter were supplied along with the compressors, the said
\nitems were classifiable under their own respective Headings,
\nnamely, 84.83 (fly wheel), 84.81 (safety wheel) and 84.21
\n(filter).  According to the assessee, the said three items were
\nnot classifiable as “compressor” under tariff Heading 84.14.  In
\nthis connection, reliance was placed by the assessee on Note 2
\nto Section XVI of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 which,
\ninter alia, states that parts of machines are to be classified
\nunder their respective headings.\n<\/p>\n
6.\tBy order dated 31.12.99, the Commissioner held that fly
\nwheel, safety valve and filter were essential parts in the
\ncompressors; that, similarly bought-out items, namely, motor
\npulley, V. belt, belt guard, angle valve etc. were also to be
\ntreated as parts, as the compressor was non-functional
\nwithout such bought-out items; that the compressors supplied
\nat sites by the assessee were basically compressors in SKD
\ncondition; in that connection reliance was placed on General
\nInterpretative Rule 2(a), Part-V Section XVI of HSN, Part-III
\nSection XVI of the Interpretative Notes 2(a) and 3(b) as also
\nNote 3 to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; that from the
\ncost statements filed by the assessee, the difference between
\nthe manufacturing cost and the declared assessable value for
\ncompressors of different sizes was clear.  Therefore, in the
\naforesaid circumstances, the show cause notice stood
\nconfirmed.\n<\/p>\n
7.\tAggrieved by the decision dated 31.12.99 given by the
\nCommissioner, the assessee carried the matter in appeal to
\nCEGAT which took the view that the compressor, cleared by
\nthe assessee, stood cleared as a “stand-alone” item and that it
\nwas not removed in an unassembled or disassembled
\ncondition and, therefore, there was no question of applying
\nGeneral Interpretative Rule 2(a), Part-V Section XVI of HSN;
\nthat, similarly Part-III of Section XVI of Interpretative Notes  of
\nHSN was not applicable as the compressor was cleared as a
\n“stand-alone” item.  According to the Tribunal, since parts of
\nthe compressor, namely, fly wheel, safety valve and filter as
\nalso bought-out items were classifiable under separate
\nheadings, namely, 84.83, 8481 and 84.21, the Department
\nhad erred in classifying them as “compressors”.  According to
\nCEGAT, the said items were classifiable under specific
\nheadings by virtue of Note 2(a) to Section XVI of the Central
\nExcise Tariff Act, 1985 and, therefore, the said three items
\ncould not have been classified as “compressor”.  However, on
\nthe question as to whether the assessee had transferred the
\nvalue of the compressor to the value of the parts, the matter
\nwas remitted to the Commissioner.  The Department had
\nalleged in the show cause notice that the assessee had
\nundervalued the compressors and had overvalued the
\naccessories which were supplied either in the same packing or
\nseparately to the buyers.  This question has been remitted to
\nthe Commissioner.  Aggrieved by the decision delivered by the
\nTribunal dated 18.9.01, the Department has come to this
\nCourt by way of the present civil appeals.\n<\/p>\n
8.\tWe quote hereinbelow Rule 2(a) of the Rules for
\nInterpretation of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act,
\n1985 which reads as below:\n<\/p>\n
“2 (a) Any reference in a heading to goods shall be
\ntaken to include a reference to those goods
\nincomplete or unfinished, provided that, the
\nincomplete or unfinished goods have the essential
\ncharacter of the complete or finished goods.  It shall
\nalso be taken to include a reference to those goods
\ncomplete or finished (or falling to be classified as
\ncomplete or finished by virtue of this rule), removed
\nunassembled or disassembled.”\n<\/p>\n
9.\tWe also quote hereinbelow Section Note 2 to Section XVI
\nof the Central Excise Tariff  which reads as below:
\n“2. Subject to Note 1 to this Section, Note 1 to
\nChapter 84 and to Note 1 to Chapter 85, parts of
\nmachines (not being parts of the articles of heading
\n84.84, 85.44, 85.45, 85.46 or 85.47) are to be
\nclassified according to the following rules:\n<\/p>\n
(a)\tParts which are goods included in any of
\nthe headings of Chapter 84 or Chapter 85
\n(other than heading Nos. 84.09, 84.31,
\n84.48, 84.66, 84.73, 84.85, 85.03, 85.22,
\n85.29, 85.38 and 85.48) are in all cases to
\nbe classified in their respective headings;\n<\/p>\n
(b)\tOther parts, if suitable for use solely or
\nprincipally with a particular kind of
\nmachine, or with a number of machines of
\nthe same heading (including a machine of
\nheading No. 84.79 or heading No.85.43) are
\nto be classified with the machines of that
\nkind or in heading 84.09, 84.31, 84.48,
\n84.66, 84.73, 85.03, 85.22, 85.29 or 85.38
\nas appropriate.  However, parts which are
\nequally suitable for use principally with the
\ngoods of heading Nos. 85.17 and 85.25 to
\n85.28 are to be classified in heading No.
\n85.17;\n<\/p>\n
(c)\tAll other parts are to be classified in
\nheading 84.09, 84.31, 84.48, 84.66, 84.73,
\n85.03, 85.22, 85.29 or 85.38 as
\nappropriate or, failing that, in heading No.
\n84.85 or 85.48.”\n<\/p>\n
10.\tWe also quote hereinbelow Section Note 2 to Section XVI
\nof the HSN which reads as below:\n<\/p>\n
“2. Subject to Note 1 to this Section, Note 1 to
\nChapter 84 and Note 1 to Chapter 85, parts of
\nmachines (not being parts of the articles of heading
\n84.84, 85.44, 85.45, 85.46 or 85.47) are to be
\nclassified according to the following rules:\n<\/p>\n
(a)\tParts which are goods included in any of
\nthe headings of Chapter 84 or 85 (other
\nthan headings 84.09, 84.31, 84.48, 84.66,
\n84.73, 84.85, 85.03, 85.22, 85.29, 85.38
\nand 85.48) are in all cases to be classified
\nin their respective headings;\n<\/p>\n
(b)\tOther parts, if suitable for use solely or
\nprincipally with a particular kind of
\nmachine, or with a number of machines of
\nthe same heading (including a machine of
\nheading 84.79 or 85.43) are to be classified
\nwith the machines of that kind or in
\nheading 84.09, 84.31, 84.48, 84.66, 84.73,
\n85.03, 85.22, 85.29 or 85.38 as
\nappropriate.  However, parts which are
\nequally suitable for use principally with the
\ngoods of headings 85.17 and 85.25 to
\n85.28 are to be classified in heading 85.17;\n<\/p>\n
(c)\tAll other parts are to be classified in
\nheading 84.09, 84.31, 84.48, 84.66, 84.73,
\n85.03, 85.22, 85.29 or 85.38 as
\nappropriate or, failing that, in heading
\n84.85 or 85.48.”\n<\/p>\n
11.\tWe quote hereinbelow Explanatory Note dealing with
\nParts of a Machine in HSN which reads as below:\n<\/p>\n
“PARTS<\/p>\n
\tIn general, parts which are suitable for use
\nsolely or principally with particular machines or
\napparatus (including those of heading 84.79 or
\nheading 85.43), or with a group of machines of
\napparatus falling in the same heading, are
\nclassified in the same heading as those machines
\nor apparatus subject, of course, to the exclusions
\nmentioned in Part (I) above. Separate headings are,
\nhowever, provided for:\n<\/p>\n
(A)\tParts of the engines of heading 84.07 or
\n84.08 (heading 84.09).\n<\/p>\n
(B)\tParts of the machinery of headings 84.25 to
\n84.30 (heading 84.31).\n<\/p>\n
(C)\tParts of the textile machines of headings
\n84.44 to 84.47 (heading 84.48)
\n(D)\tParts of the machine-tools of headings 84.56
\nto 84.65 (heading 84.66).\n<\/p>\n
(E)\tParts of the office machines of headings
\n84.69 to 84.72 (heading 84.73).\n<\/p>\n
(F)\tParts of the machines of heading 85.01 or
\n85.02 (heading 85.03).\n<\/p>\n
(G)\tParts of apparatus of headings 85.19 to
\n85.21 (heading 85.22).\n<\/p>\n
(H)\tParts of apparatus of headings 85.25 to
\n85.28 (heading 85.29).\n<\/p>\n
(IJ) Parts of apparatus of heading 85.35, 85.36
\nor 85.37 (heading 85.38).\n<\/p>\n
\tThe above rules do not apply to parts which
\nin themselves constitute an article covered by a
\nheading of this Section (other than headings
\n84.85 and 85.48); these are in all cases
\nclassified in their own appropriate heading even
\nif specially designed to work as part of a specific
\nmachine. This applies in particular to:\n<\/p>\n
(1)\t Pumps and compressors (headings 84.13
\nand 84.14)<\/p>\n
(2)\t Filtering machinery and apparatus of
\nheading 84.21.\n<\/p>\n
(3)\t Lifting and handling machinery (heading
\n84.25, 84.26 or   84.28).\n<\/p>\n
(4)\t Taps, cocks, valves, etc. (heading 84.81).\n<\/p>\n
(5)\t Ball or roller bearings, and polished steel
\nballs of a tolerance not exceeding 1% or 0.05
\nmm, whichever is less (heading 84.82).\n<\/p>\n
(6)\t Transmission shafts, cranks, bearing
\nhousings, plain shaft bearings, gears and
\ngearing (including friction gears and gear-
\nboxes and other speed changers), flywheels,
\npulleys and pulley blocks, clutches and shaft
\ncouplings (heading 84.83).\n<\/p>\n
(7) Gaskets and similar joints of heading 84.84.”\n<\/p>\n
12.\tWe quote hereinbelow Part V Section XVI of HSN which
\nreads as below:\n<\/p>\n
“(V) UNASSEMBLED MACHINES
\n(See General Interpretative Rule 2 (a))<\/p>\n
\tFor convenience of transport many machines
\nand apparatus are transported in an unassembled
\nstate.  Although in effect the goods are then a
\ncollection of parts, they are classified as being the
\nmachine in question and not in any separate
\nheading for part.  The same applies to an
\nincomplete machine having the features of the
\ncomplete machine (see part IV), presented
\nunassembled (see also in this connection the
\nGeneral Explanatory Notes to Chapters 84 and 85).
\nHowever, unassembled components in excess of the
\nnumber required for a complete machine or for an
\nincomplete machine having the characteristics of a
\ncomplete machine, are classified in their own
\nappropriate heading.”\n<\/p>\n
13.\tWe quote hereinbelow Part III Section XVI of the
\nInterpretative Notes of HSN which reads as below:\n<\/p>\n
“(III) ACCESSORY APARATUS
\n(See General interpretative Rules 2(a) and 3(b) and
\nSection Notes 3 and 4)<\/p>\n
Accessory instruments and apparatus (e.g.,
\nmanometers, thermometers, level gauges or other
\nmeasuring or checking instruments, output
\ncounters, clockwork switches, control panels,
\nautomatic regulators) presented with the machine
\nor apparatus with which they normally belong are
\nclassified with that machine or apparatus, if they
\nare designed to measure, check, control or regulate
\none specific machine or apparatus (which may be a
\ncombination of machines (see Part VI) or a
\nfunctional unit (see part VII)).  However, accessory
\ninstruments and apparatus designed to measure,
\ncheck, control or regulate several machines
\n(whether or not of the same type) fall in their own
\nappropriate heading.”\n<\/p>\n
14.\tChargeability from excise duty is on the manufacture of
\nexcisable goods.  The assessee has to pay duty on the
\nmanufacture of such goods.  With chargeability, question of
\nquantification of duty comes in.  Classification decides the
\napplicable rate.  It is followed by valuation i.e. value on which
\nthe rate is to be applied.  The concept of “classification” is,
\ntherefore, different from the concept of “valuation”.  In the
\npresent matter there is confusion in application of the
\naforestated two concepts by the Commissioner.  In our view,
\nthe thrust of the show cause notice is towards undervaluation
\nand not classification.  This is made clear even in the order of
\nthe Commissioner vide para 53 which reads as under:
\n“53.\t    On consideration of the arguments of
\nboth sides and the facts on record I find that
\nshow cause notice dated 1.10.86 proposed
\nclassification of flywheel, safety valve and filter
\nunder SH 8414.91 of CET 1985. The Show
\nCause Notice dated 10.11.86, which
\nsuperceded  the above SCN also proposed the
\nsame classification. The present show cause
\nnotice also does not propose any fresh
\nclassification. Here the issue involved is
\ndifferent. The issue is not whether the items
\nlike fly wheel, pulley and safety valve are
\nclassifiable under SH 8414.10 or 8414.19 or in
\nthe specific sub heading where these items
\nhave been specifically mentioned. The issue
\nhere is whether M\/s FIL have made correct
\nassessment of duty and have paid appropriate
\nduty leviable thereon on the compressors
\ncleared by them during the period relevant to
\nthis Show Cause. The case of the Department
\nis that since these items are essential parts of
\nthe compressors and have been supplied
\nalongwith compressors in SKD condition, the
\nvalue of such parts is includible in the
\nassessable value of compressors. I have
\nalready come to the conclusion that the above
\nitems are essential parts of the compressors as
\ndiscussed in paragraphs 42 to 48 supra. Thus
\nthe point raised by the notice becomes
\nredundant.”\n<\/p>\n
(emphasis supplied by us)\n<\/p>\n
15.\tAs rightly observed by the Tribunal, the General
\nInterpretative Rule 2(a) has no application to the present case
\nfor two reasons.  Firstly, the compressor manufactured by the
\nassessee was removed as a “stand-alone” item.  It was not
\ncleared in an unassembled or disassembled condition.
\nSecondly, section and chapter notes in Central Excise Tariff
\nAct, 1985 and the Interpretative Rules do not provide
\nguidelines for valuation of excisable goods as they decide
\nclassification of a product under different headings\/sub-
\nheadings of the tariff.  Lastly, under Note 2(a) to Section XVI of
\nthe Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 as well as Note 2(a) to
\nSection XVI of HSN read with Explanatory Note referable to
\nParts of a Machine in HSN clarifies that payment of duty at the
\nappropriate rates, relevant to the respective headings alone,
\nshall apply.  In the present case, as stated above a complete
\ncompressor stood cleared under tariff Heading 84.14.  Duty
\nhas been paid thereof.  Similarly, safety valves were cleared by
\nthe assessee on payment of duty under tariff Heading 84.81.
\nLastly, filters were also cleared by payment of duty under tariff
\nHeading 84.21.  In the circumstances, on the question of
\nclassification the Tribunal was right in holding that
\nparts\/accessories could not have been classified as
\n“compressors” under tariff Heading 84.14.\n<\/p>\n
16.\tHowever, we find merit in these civil appeals filed by the
\nDepartment on the question of valuation.  As stated above, the
\nconcept of “classification” is different from the concept of
\n“valuation”.  In the present matter, along with the “stand-
\nalone” compressor, the assessee has supplied fly wheel, safety
\nvalve and filter to its buyers.  They have also supplied bought-
\nout items like V. belt, motor, pulley, belt guard, gauge, gauge
\nboard, angle valve, M.S. male flange, C.A.F. Gasket, set of
\ntools, bolts and nuts, etc. to their buyers, as a package.
\nTherefore, on the question of valuation, the Commissioner
\nshould have examined the pricing aspect of the entire package
\nsupplied by the assessee to its buyers.  For example, when a
\nceiling fan is sold to the buyer, apart from the parts of the
\nceiling fan, there may be a remote which is a part of the
\npackage supplied to the buyer.  That remote is fan-specific in
\nmatter of valuation since the remote is an additional feature
\nprovided with the ceiling fan its value has also to be taken into
\naccount.  This is because the remote which operates the fan
\nmay be an accessory but still it makes value addition and,
\ntherefore, its value is liable to be included in the assessable
\nvalue of the ceiling fan.  These aspects have not been
\nconsidered by the Commissioner, therefore, in addition to the
\nquestion remitted by CEGAT to the Commissioner we also
\ndirect the Commissioner to de novo consider the question of
\nvaluation.  In this connection, the Commissioner will call for
\nthe cost statements and shall also ascertain the manner in
\nwhich the assessee has priced its goods.  The Commissioner
\nmay also consider invocation of Section 14A of the Central
\nExcise Act, 1944 which deals with “special audits in certain
\ncases”.  In our view, in the present matter “costing” as a
\nconcept will play an important role and, therefore, if the
\nCommissioner so deems fit he can order special audits and
\ncall for the report of the cost accountant to assist him
\n(Commissioner) to arrive at the correct value of the entire
\npackage cleared by the assessee from its factory gate.\n<\/p>\n
17.\tAccordingly, the civil appeals filed by the Department are
\npartly allowed with no order as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Commissioner Of Central Excise, … vs M\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007 Author: Kapadia Bench: S. H. Kapadia, B. Sudershan Reddy CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 1825-1827 of 2002 PETITIONER: Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi RESPONDENT: M\/s. Frick India Ltd. & Another DATE OF JUDGMENT: 21\/09\/2007 BENCH: S. […]<\/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-8434","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nCommissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007 - 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\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-09-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-29T16:23:20+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\\\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commissioner Of Central Excise, … vs M\\\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-29T16:23:20+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007\"},\"wordCount\":2869,\"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\\\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007\",\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M\\\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-29T16:23:20+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Central Excise, … vs M\\\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007 - 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\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-09-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-29T16:23:20+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\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commissioner Of Central Excise, … vs M\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007","datePublished":"2007-09-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-29T16:23:20+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007"},"wordCount":2869,"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\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007","name":"Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-09-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-29T16:23:20+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-central-excise-vs-ms-frick-india-ltd-another-on-21-september-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commissioner Of Central Excise, … vs M\/S. Frick India Ltd. & Another on 21 September, 2007"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8434","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=8434"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8434\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8434"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8434"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8434"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}