TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 441X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und plan was submitted and approved - appeals, being devoid of any merit – appeal is dismissed - 3889-3891 of 2003 - - - Dated:- 6-5-2010 - D.K. Jain, P. Sathasivam and Aftab Alam, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Bhatt, Sr. Counsel, for the Appellant. [Order]. - These appeals, by special leave, are directed against the final judgment and order dated 23rd January 2002 delivered by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Civil Application No. 2528 of 1984. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has quashed orders dated 11th May, 1984 and 14th May, 1984 whereby the Assistant Collector had cancelled the approved price list and the revised ground plan respectively as also the consequential show cause notices issued to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent authority, after conducting enquiry finally approved the fresh price list on 7th October, 1983. 3. On 11th May, 1984, the same authority who had approved the price list and the revised ground plan cancelled the approval of the price list. On 14th May, 1984, the approval of the revised ground plan was also cancelled. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee challenged the said two orders before the High Court by way of a writ petition. As stated above, the High Court, following the decision of this Court in J.G. Glass Industries Ltd. and others (supra) has allowed the petition and set aside both the said orders. Aggrieved thereby, the revenue is before us in these appeals. 5.We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6.&# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es, the basic character of the commodity does not change. They continue to be bottles and, therefore, it cannot be said that but for the process of printing, the bottles will serve no purpose or are of no commercial use. However, while holding so, the Court drew a distinction between a case where the printing on the bottles was also carried out in the same factory where the bottles were manufactured and a case where the printing on the bottles was being carried out in a separate unit. The Court finally held that if the printing and decoration etc. on such bottles was carried out in a premises different from that in which the bottles were manufactured, the value of the printing will not be includible while determining the assessable value of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
