COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE BELAPURversusJINDAL DRUGS LTD.
2024 INSC 35430 April 2024Dismissed
Jindal Drugs Ltd. imported cocoa butter and cocoa powder and also received the same from its Jammu unit, then affixed two additional labels on each carton at its Taloja plant before exporting the goods. The Commissioner of Central Excise challenged the company's claim of CENVAT credit and export rebate, arguing that th…
M/S OSWAL PETROCHEMICALS LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI - II
2025 INSC 57828 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed
M/s Oswal Petrochemicals Ltd. had classified its benzene and toluene products under chapter 29 (sub‑heading 2902.00) and obtained approval in 1990. The Excise Department later sampled the products, obtained test reports showing purity below 96%, and re‑classified them under chapter 27 (sub‑headings 2707.10 and 2707.20)…
RADHIKA AGARWALversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
2025 INSC 27227 February 2025
The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of the amendments to the Customs Act, 1962 and the arrest provisions in the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, arguing that offences under these statutes remain non‑cognizable and that authorized officers must obtain a magistrate's warrant, relying on the Om…
M/S RIMJHIM ISPAT LIMITED AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER
2025 INSC 90124 July 2025Dismissed
The appellants, M/s Rimjhim Ispat Ltd. and related companies, were investigated for alleged illegal manufacture and removal of excisable goods, leading to departmental adjudication orders imposing large duties and penalties under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Departmental order dated 31‑03‑2011 was set aside by the…
M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.versusTHE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE
2024 INSC 88020 November 2024Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined whether mobile service providers (MSPs) could claim CENVAT credit on excise duties paid for mobile towers and prefabricated buildings (PFBs) used in their networks. The dispute arose from conflicting decisions of the Bombay High Court, which held the towers and PFBs to be immovable property a…
BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE NASHIK COMMISSIONERATE
2025 INSC 8420 January 2025
The Supreme Court examined whether the price fixed under a 2002 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) among oil marketing companies (OMCs) could be treated as the sole consideration for excise duty valuation under Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It held that the MOU was primarily a supply‑ensuring arrangem…
M/S QUIPPO ENERGY LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AHMEDABAD – II
2025 INSC 113019 September 2025Dismissed
M/s Quippo Energy Ltd. imported gas generating sets (Gensets) and, to facilitate leasing, placed each Genset inside a steel container and added components such as a radiator, ventilation fan, air filter, oil tank, pipes, pumps, valve and silencer, creating a product it called a "Power Pack". The Revenue argued that thi…
NABHA POWER LIMITEDversusPUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS
2025 INSC 100219 August 2025Dismissed
Nabha Power Ltd (NPL) and Talwandi Sabo Power Ltd (TSPL) entered into Power Purchase Agreements (PPA) with Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd (PSPCL) for a 700 MW coal‑fired project. They claimed that deemed export benefits under Paragraph 8.3 of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2009‑2014 were available at the bid cut‑of…
/S PATANJALI FOODS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S RUCHI SOYA INDUSTRIES LTD.)versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2025 INSC 73319 May 2025Case Allowed
M/s Patanjali Foods Ltd. (formerly Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd.) challenged the customs department’s encashment of bank guarantees that were furnished as security under interim High Court orders. The company argued that such encashment could not be treated as "payment of duty" for purposes of a refund under Section 27 of…
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SALEMversusM/S MADHAN AGRO INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD.
[2024] 12 S.C.R. 89318 December 2024Dismissed
The case concerned whether pure coconut oil sold in small retail packs (5 ml‑2 L) should be classified as ‘edible oil’ under Heading 1513 of Chapter 15 or as ‘hair oil’ under Heading 3305 of Chapter 33 in the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The respondents marketed the oil as edible oil, while th…
KESARI NANDAN MOBILEversusOFFICE OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (2), ENFORCEMENT DIVISION – 5
2025 INSC 98314 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Kesari Nandan Mobile, challenged two provisional attachment orders dated 13 November 2024 and 18 December 2024 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax under section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act. The orders were issued after earlier attachment orders of October 2023 had au…
M/S STEMCYTE INDIA THERAPEUTICS PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, AHMEDABAD -III
2025 INSC 84114 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed
M/s Stemcyte India Therapeutics, a joint‑venture stem‑cell bank, was assessed service tax for its enrolment, collection, processing and storage of umbilical cord blood stem cells for the period 1 July 2012 to 16 February 2014. The appellant claimed exemption as a "Healthcare Service" under Notification No.25/2012‑ST an…
LIPI BOILERS LTD.versusTHE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AURANGABAD
2025 INSC 129710 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed
Lipi Boilers Ltd. entered into a contract to design, procure, manufacture and supply a bagasse‑fired boiler in CKD condition, with several bought‑out components delivered directly to the buyer’s site. The revenue issued a show‑cause notice alleging that the value of these bought‑out items should be added to the boiler’…
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR -IIversusM/S MIRAJ PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.
2024 INSC 4708 July 2024Dismissed
The Commissioner of Central Excise issued show‑cause notices alleging that Miraj Products packaged chewing tobacco in poly packs that were group packages intended for retail sale, thereby attracting Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Miraj contended that the poly packs were placed inside HDPE bags, which were …
BACCAROSE PERFUMES AND BEAUTY PRODUCTS PVT. LTDversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR.
2024 INSC 6626 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed
Baccarose Perfumes and Beauty Products Pvt. Ltd (the appellant) challenged the Special Judge's order taking cognizance of alleged offences relating to the payment of Countervailing Duty (CVD) on invoice value instead of Maximum Retail Price (MRP). The company claimed that it had been granted immunity from prosecution u…
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusM/S. B.T. PATIL AND SONS BELGAUM (CONSTRUCTION) PVT. LTD
2024 INSC 835 February 2024Dismissed
The respondent, a class‑I civil contractor, completed work on the Koyna Hydro Electric Project funded by the World Bank and claimed duty drawback as a "deemed export" under the Exim Policy 1992‑1997. After multiple rejections by the DGFT, a Policy Interpretation Committee in 2002 allowed the drawback, which was paid in…
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX, RAJKOTversusNARSIBHAI KARAMSIBHAI GAJERA & ORS.
2025 INSC 13742 December 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Rajkot issued a show‑cause notice alleging that two adjoining units (Unit 1 and Unit 2) processed grey cotton fabrics into finished cotton fabrics using power, thereby denying them exemption under Notification No. 5/1998‑CE. The units appealed, and the CESTAT h…
THE STATE OF GOA & ANR.versusNAMITA TRIPATHI
2025 INSC 3062 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Goa filed a complaint alleging that the respondent's professional laundry service operated as a factory without a valid licence, violating the Factories Act, 1948. A Judicial Magistrate First Class issued summons on the basis of the complaint, but the High Court quashed the process, holding that dry‑cleani…