-
2013 (8) TMI 310
Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act – Allegation of fraud not mentioned in the Show-Cause Notice – Held that:- Fraud, collusion and any other such ingredient has not been mentioned either in the show cause notice or in the order in original. In the absence of which it is difficult to sustain the penalty equal to duty amount in the present case – Decided against the Revenue.
-
2013 (8) TMI 309
Cenvat credit in respect of input services namely, errection, commissioning and installation, man-power recruitment and civil construction, used in the employees staff colony, canteen and residence of the Executive Director of the Company - These services were not used directly or indirectly in the manufacture of final products and as such, are not eligible to be classified as ‘input services’ as defined in 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules – Held that:- As per the decision in the case of CCE, Hyderabad vs. M/s. ITC Ltd. reported in [2011 (11) T....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 308
Cenvat Credit/ Modvat Credit on M.S. Sheets and on electrodes - Appellant are engaged in manufacture of V.P. Sugar and Molasses falling under Central Excise Chapter Heading 17.01 and 17.03 of the Central Excise Tariff – Show cause notice issued on the ground that neither M.S.Sheets nor electrodes qualify for as capital goods/inputs under Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rule – Held that:- Goods were used in repair and maintenance of the machinery in the factory – Further, relying on the judgment in the case of Ambuja Cements Eastern Ltd [2010 (4....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 307
Limitation - Respondents are engaged in manufacture of CTD Bar, MS Angle, MS Channel, MS Round, MS Square etc - Sale of Roll scrap, a capital goods are cleared as, waste and scrap assessee is required to pay duty on transaction value under Rule 3 (5A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules - A Show Cause Notice dated 23.03.2009 was issued to the respondents demanding duty – Held that:- Audit team visited M/s. Ramesh Industries, Raipur a sister concerned of the Appellant unit and they had knowledge of this facts right from the date of Audit in M/s. Ramesh ....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 306
Cenvat Credit of Service Tax paid on input service in respect of dismantling/handling of unusable material and its transportation - Manufacturing activity undertaken by the appellants comprises of making of concentrate by purification of ores. Entire purification process involves handling of abrasive, corrosive materials and acids which lead to corrosion of metallic and others surfaces which are to be removed periodically from the main machines and are to be replaced with new ones. Appellant has given contract for Dismantling, Sorting and tran....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 305
Waiver of pre-deposit - cenvat credit - duty paying documents - M/s. Praveen Foundry Pvt. Ltd. (Applicant No.1) is a manufacturer of castings of automobiles. They purchased MS scrap and SS scrap from registered dealers and used in the manufacture of castings. Original authority confirmed the demand of duty and imposed penalty of equal amount along with interest on the ground that they received MS scrap but the duty paying documents were showing the goods as MS channels and angles, rods, rounds etc – Held that:- Applicant No.2, Shri A. Radhakri....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 304
Cenvat Credit of service tax paid on ‘Outdoor catering Service’ - Respondent unit having more than 250 workers in their factory providing canteen facility to the workers and staff of the factory - Held that: - Cenvat Credit would be inadmissible only to the extent the charges for canteen facility are recovered by the Respondent from employees and to the extent the charges are not recovered from the employees, they would be eligible for Cenvat Credit relying upon the decision in the cases of CCE Nagpur Vs. Ultratech Cement Limited reported in [....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 303
Waiver of pre-deposit under section 35F of the Central Excise Act - Appellant did not file any stay petition before the Commissioner (Appeals) – Held that:- Appellant had neither deposited the amount confirmed nor filed stay petition before the Commissioner (Appeals). Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected their appeal for non-compliance of the provisions of Section 35 – Decided against the Assessee.
-
2013 (8) TMI 302
National Litigation Policy framed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs – Amount involved in litigation – Held that:- As per the National Litigation Policy framed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, department is required not to file any appeal before the Tribunal in cases where the duty involved is less than Rs. Five lakhs - In the present appeals the duty involved, is nominal and much less than the limit of Rs. Five lakhs – Appeal not maintainable – Decided against the Revenue.
-
2013 (8) TMI 301
Cenvat Credit – setting of paint shop - items were used in the factory for fabrication and erection of paint shop, which being fixed to the earth structure, is not excisable – Held that:- Objection by the department is absurd, as for permitting capital goods Cenvat credit, what has to be seen is as to whether the goods fall in the Chapters specified in the definition of capital goods or are the items specifically mentioned in the definition of capital goods and secondly whether those goods were used in the factory. The purpose for which the go....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 270
Exemption of not printing MRP as per provisions of Rule 26 of LMPC Rules - Petitioner no.1 is a partnership firm engaged in manufacturing of 'Branded Chewing Tobacco'. The petitioner no.2 is the partner of petitioner no.1 firm - Exemption given under Rule 26 of the LMPC Rules (earlier Rule 34 of SWMPC Rules) to the manufacturers for sale of goods in net weight of less than ten grams or 10 milliliter are exempted from declaring maximum retail price – Held that:- The provisions of Rule required it to print the weight of finished goods on each pa....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 269
Limitation period for issue of recovery notice under section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Respondent mill is engaged in the manufacture and clearance of made up textile articles and processed textile - Respondent has charged and collected the Central Excise Duty in respect of supply of certain 'towels hand white' ,but has failed to deposit the Central Excise Duty - The period for which the duty has not been paid on the goods i.e. hand towels is April, 1996 to June, 1996. The show-cause notice is dated 6th of March, 2003 and was served....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 268
Interest on refund under section 11BB of the Central Excise Act - Application for refund was filed by the petitioner on March 29, 2000 - The amount claimed as refund being the duty paid and continued to lie as pre-deposit - Tribunal decided in favour of the present appellants on September 3, 2001, and also further held that payment of interest would start running from September 3, 2001 – Held that:- Any delay having been occasioned in refunding the amount beyond the period of thee months, would attract interest - The refund of amount considere....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 267
Waiver of pre-deposit - Clandestine Removal of goods – Held that:- Allegation regarding clandestine removal is based only on the Sales Manager Report (SMR) and not corroborated by evidences showing clandestine manufacture and clearance. The sharing of budget expenditure for advertisement does not provide any better evidence – Relying upon the decision in the case of CCE Meerut Vs Moon Beverages Ltd. - 2002 (150) ELT 976 (Tri.-Del.).- Decided in favor of Assessee. SSI exemption – Using the brand name of others - Wrong availment of SSI exemption....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 266
Waiver of pre-deposit – clandestine removal – Held that:- Following the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the identical case of Belgium Glass and Ceramics………………….., it is directed to assessee to deposit an amount which is equivalent to 8% of the total duty confirmed by the adjudicating authority - Amount is short to the tune of Rs. 8 Lakhs, as the appellant is required to deposit approximately Rs. 26 Lakhs and they have deposited only Rs. 18 Lakhs. Accordingly, appellant is directed to further deposit an amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Ru....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 265
Waiver of pre-deposit – Stay application - Exemption under notification No.108/95-CE dt. 28.8.1995 is not available when goods are supplied to contractors executing approved projects – Held that:- Objection of the Revenue that exemption is not available when goods are supplied to contractors executing approved projects is not sustainable in view of the decision of the Hon. Madras High Court in the case of CCE Vs. Caterpillar India Pvt Ltd-[2013 (7) TMI 244]. Benefit of Notification No.108/95-CE dt. 28.8.1995 - Explanation 2 added to Notificati....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 264
Clandestine Removal of goods - During the physical verification of the goods in the factory by the Central Excise officers on 22nd December 2007 shortage of M.S. bars of 131.600 MTs was noticed – Held that:- Shortage was admitted by shri Ashish Sharma in his statement dated 22.12.2007. He admitted that due to holiday on 21.12.2007 no invoice should be made to show clearance made on 22.12.2007. Since the goods were cleared without payment of duty these clearances are to be treated as clandestine removal of the goods – Decided against the Assessee.
-
2013 (8) TMI 263
Cenvat credit of excise duty paid on welding electrodes is admissible to the assesse as Cenvat Credit – Relying upon the decision of Chhattisgarh High Court in case of Ambuja Cement Eastern Ltd. Vs. CCE [2010 (4) TMI 429 - CHHAITISGARH HIGH COURT], and the judgement of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka High Court in case of Alfred Herbert (India) Ltd.[ 2010 (4) TMI 424 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT], it has been held that the Cenvat credit in the duty paid on the welding electrodes is admissible to the assessee – Decided in favor of Assessee.
-
2013 (8) TMI 232
Cenvat Credit - Input services - Commission paid to the foreign agents - whether the manufacturer is entitled for credit in respect of credit of Service Tax paid on commission agents service. – Held that:- Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Cadila Healthcare Ltd. [2013 (1) TMI 304 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] (Guj.), held in favour of the Revenue - Court is unable to concur with the contrary view taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Ambika Overseas [2011 (7) TMI 980 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIG....... + More
-
2013 (8) TMI 231
Penalty increased by First Appellate Authority on the appeal filed by Assessee – Held that:- The first appellate authority has not issued any show cause notice to the appellant for enhancement of the penalty, despite there being statutory provisions in Section 35A of Central Excise Act, 1944. To that extent, the impugned order of the first appellate authority is inconsistent with the provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944 and is unsustainable on that ground itself - The enhancement of penalty by the first appellate authority without issuing sh....... + More
....
