COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE vs M/S. INOX AIR PRODUCTS LTD. THROUGH MANAGER — C.A. No. 2986/2005

Case under Section I-B. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010057312005

Filing Date

11-Mar-2005

Registration No

C.A. No. 2986/2005

Diary Number

5731/2005

Order Date

11-May-2018

Document Type

Judgement - of Main Case

Neutral Citation

2018 INSC 475

Disposal Type

Dismissed as not pressed

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Section I-B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

    Adv. B. KRISHNA PRASAD[P-1]

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.M/S. INOX AIR PRODUCTS LTD. THROUGH MANAGER

    Adv. PRASHANT KUMAR[R-1]

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-May-2018

    Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana, Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Abdul Nazeer

  3. 21-Feb-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  4. 11-Mar-2005

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 2986/2005

Common Record of Proceedings — heard with connected matters

Lead case: SLP(Crl) No. 588/2005

PDF 1
View Full Judgment
casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Supreme Court held that the measure (value) for excise duty levy under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is not controlled by the nature of the levy itself, and that post-manufacturing expenses and value additions up to the point of clearance can be included in the "transaction value" for determining excise duty. The court reconciled the seemingly conflicting decisions in *Bombay Tyre International Ltd.* and *Acer India Ltd.* by clarifying that charges for packing, storage, marketing, and other value-enriching services are permissible additions to price, except where non-dutiable items are artificially bundled with dutiable goods merely to inflate assessable value. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts District Courts
Search Another Case