Advanced Search Options
Central Excise - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 76189 Records
More information of case laws are visible to the Subscriber of a package i.e:-
Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote & Decision etc.
- 2020 (10) TMI 1063 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
Calculation of Interest for delayed payment of Excise Duty - relevant date - period of dispute is September, 2005 to March, 2015 - whether the demand of interest is to be calculated from the date of clearance of goods upto the date of actual payment of duty or from the date of determination of due amount till actual date of payment of duty? HELD THAT:- Similar issue arose before the Division Bench of this Tribunal in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI VERSUS LUCAS TVS LTD. [2009 (12) TMI 828 - CESTAT CHENNAI] wherein the facts were that vide adjudication orders dated 9.1.1995 and 10.02.1995, the demand of over ₹ 34 lakhs was determined. These demands were set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide an order dated 20.06.1995. The order-in-appeal was set aside by the Tribunal and the matter was remanded to the Commis....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 1032 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
CENVAT Credit - additional duty of customs paid - rule 3 (1)(vii) of the CENVAT Credit Rules - Customs duty of excise duty - concessional rate of tax under Customs Notification dated March 17, 2012 - extended period of limitation - levy of interest and penalty. HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that both Hindustan Zinc and Ultratech Cement paid additional duty of Customs under section 3 (1) of the Customs Tariff Act, after availing the benefit of the Customs Notification dated March 17, 2012 and that they also availed CENVAT credit of the additional duty of customs so paid under rule 3(1)(vii) of the CENVAT Credit Rules. This availment of CENVAT credit has been denied to them for the reason that the additional duty of customs paid @ 2% was not the duty of excise as specified in the Excise Tariff Act and so CENVAT credit of the additional d....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 1005 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
CENVAT Credit - input services - marine insurance services provided by the insurance companies - place of removal - HELD THAT:- All services received by the manufacturer directly or indirectly in relation to the manufacture of final products upto the place of removal are admissible for availment of Cenvat Credit on the Service Tax paid for such services. The goods are being cleared by the appellants to their buyers on FOR basis and all liabilities in respect of transportation of goods or even damage to goods were on account of the appellants/manufacturer. It is the appellants who were liable for safe delivery of goods up to their customer‟s door steps. The impugned service of marine insurance was taken to cover the risk of transportation of goods. Thus, present becomes the case were the service of insurance of goods to be supplied t....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 1004 - CESTAT KOLKATA
Maintainability of appeal - monetary amount involved in the appeal - HELD THAT:- The amount involved in the present case is below the monetary limit of ₹ 50.00 Lakhs which has been notified vide Board’s Instruction being F.No.390/Misc/116/2017-JC dated 22 August 2019 - the appeal is dismissed under National Litigation Policy.
- 2020 (10) TMI 958 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Demand of Interest over differential duty or unpaid service tax - Direction to deposit the arrears of interest on the enhanced rate of washed coking coal dispatched to the Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) in terms of long terms agreement between the SAIL and this petitioner Bharat Coking Coal Limited (BCCL) for the period from April 2011 to March, 2012 - Section 87 of the Finance Act, 1994 - HELD THAT:- By virtue of this judgment in the case of M/S. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIPUR [2019 (5) TMI 657 - SUPREME COURT] the issue now stands settled that the assessee is liable to pay interest upon the differential duty and / or the unpaid service tax detected by the Revenue. Petition dismissed.
- 2020 (10) TMI 957 - CESTAT HYDERABAD
Permission for withdrawal of appeal - Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - HELD THAT:- The appeals are dismissed as deemed to have been withdrawn as per section 127(6) of the Finance Act (No.2), 2019.
- 2020 (10) TMI 908 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
Refund of accumulated unutilized Cenvat Credit of Krishi Kalyan Cess - HELD THAT:- On the subject issue much water flown and this tribunal’s two larger bench judgments one in the case of M/S. GAURI PLASTICULTURE P. LTD., BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING CO. LTD., M/S. SIMPLEX MILLS CO. LTD. VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, INDORE, THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI IV, THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE MUMBAI I [2019 (6) TMI 820 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and in case of STEEL STRIPS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, LUDHIANA [2011 (5) TMI 111 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] are contradictory - There are various high courts judgments such as UNION OF INDIA VERSUS SLOVAK INDIA TRADING CO. PVT. LTD. [2006 (7) TMI 9 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] from Karnataka High Court, M/S. WELCURE DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICA....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 862 - CESTAT KOLKATA
Refund in terms of N/N. 33/99-CE, dated 08.07.1999 - denial only on the ground that the claim was not filed within a reasonable time - other substantive requirement of expansion in the installed capacity has been complied with - HELD THAT:- The issue came up for consideration before the Tribunal in the case of Vernerpur Tea Estate vs. CCE, Shillong [2016 (4) TMI 17 - CESTAT KOLKATA] which was decided against the assessee on the ground of limitation since refund claim was filed after a period of 6 years - the decision of the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Vernerpur Tea Estate, being directly on the point, has to be respectfully followed in the instant case inasmuch as the basic criterion of increase in the installed capacity has been duly fulfilled by the appellant and therefore, there is no reason to deny the refund. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
- 2020 (10) TMI 819 - SC ORDER
Imposition of the oil cess and National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD), education cess (EC), secondary and higher secondary education cess (SHE) - condensate which emerges out during the process of processing of the natural gas in the appellant‟s natural gas processing plant - it was held by CESTAT that the oil cess is not leviable on the “condensate” and under OIDA. HELD THAT:- The Civil Appeal is dismissed on the ground of low tax effect.
- 2020 (10) TMI 818 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
Levy of Penalty - disallowance of CENVAT Credit - supplementary invoice raised by job worker - suppression of facts or not - revenue neutrality - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- Admittedly the transaction between BALCO and VAL is duly documented and properly recorded in the books of accounts of both the companies. Further, the method of valuation adopted for clearance of calcined alumina from VAL to BALCO was under a business like formula based on the price of aluminium at LME. Further, from the facts on record, we find that there is no incentive for VAL to suppress the clearance value or pay lower tax. Whatever duty was payable as per the invoice, the same was to be paid by BALCO to VAL. Secondly, it has been demonstrated from the appeal paper book, being the extract of cenvat credit, that VAL alone had sufficient credit bala....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 756 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
CENVAT Credit - inputs procured by themselves and used in the manufacture of job work goods and cleared under Notification No. 214/86-CE dated 25.03.1986 - credit denied on the ground that goods manufactured on job work basis, wherein the subject inputs were used, have been cleared under Notification No. 214/86-CE, without payment of excise duty - HELD THAT:- The issue is no longer res-integra as in various judgments including the judgments in the appellant’s own case, BANCO ALUMINIUM LTD VERSUS C.C.E. & S.T., VADODARA-I [2019 (7) TMI 1691 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] this Tribunal has held that inputs used in the manufacture of job work goods, under Notification No. 214/86-CE dated 25.03.1986, particularly by virtue of specific provision under Rule 3(1), in the appellant’s own case, the Tribunal held that even though the job work goods are exempted under notification 214/86-CE, the credit is allowed. CENVAT credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
- 2020 (10) TMI 729 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Condonation of Delay in filing the miscellaneous application for restoration of appeal - rectification of mistake - HELD THAT:- There is no delay in filing the miscellaneous application for restoration of appeal inasmuch as upon receipt of the Final Order, the applicant /respondent had filed the appeal before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, which was withdrawn with liberty to file a rectification application before the Tribunal. Hence, the miscellaneous application is disposed of, holding that there is no delay in filing the said application before the Tribunal. Rectification of Mistake - error apparent on the face of record or not - HELD THAT:- The submissions made in the said miscellaneous application was considered by the Tribunal in specifically observing at paragraph 5 therein that during the disputed period 2005-06, the respond....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 674 - CESTAT HYDERABAD
Valuation - inclusion of transportation charges received by the appellant in the assessable value - proviso to sub-section (4)(b) of section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - HELD THAT:- This Bench in a number of cases has, after following the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR VERSUS M/S ISPAT INDUSTRIES LTD. [2015 (10) TMI 613 - SUPREME COURT], consistently decided identical issue and held that , "Hon’ble Apex Court has categorically held that under no circumstances can the buyer’s premises be the place of removal. It also made it clear that this fact was not brought to the attention of the Court when the earlier orders were passed. In view of the above, we find that it is now well settled that the buyer’s premises can never be the place o....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 635 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
Direction to the opposite party to communicate/provide/supply a copy of the order within a stipulated time - HELD THAT:- Since the dispute pertains to classification of the intermediary parts of hoists/gates of River barrages, radial gates, Penstock pipes, Embedded parts, Hoists and Hoist Supporting structures, which will have recurring effect on the petitioner, we deem it appropriate to allow the writ petition with a direction to the opposite party to provide a fresh certified copy of the order dated 21.12.2017 passed by the Commissioner of (Appeals) to the petitioner, within a period of fifteen days hence, with liberty to the petitioner to now file their appeal against the said order within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the order dated 21.12.2017 before Central Excise, Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata. Petition allowed.
- 2020 (10) TMI 634 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Rectification of Mistake - According to learned counsel for the applicant/appellant, there are some contradictions in the order of the Tribunal and the said contradictions have been mentioned in the instant application - HELD THAT:- The grounds raised by the applicant are not sufficient for any kind of rectification. It is settled legal principle that the Tribunal cannot take up exercise on re-appreciating the evidences and to embark on an act of reviewing the decision under the guise of rectification of mistake. An error apparent on the face of the record means an error which strikes on the mere looking and does not need long drawn-out process of reasoning on points where there may conceivably be two opinions. Such effort should not require any extraneous matter to show its incorrectness. To put it differently, it should be so manifest a....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 532 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH
Jurisdiction - Whether the single member bench of this tribunal is having the jurisdiction to decide the issue involving only interest irrespective of any amount in terms of Sec. 35D (3) of Central Excise Act, 1944 or not? - HELD THAT:- Section 35D (3) of Central Excise Act, 1944 restricts the powers of Single Member Bench of this Tribunal to hear the cases where the dispute is other than determination of any question having a relation to rate of excise duty or value of goods for the purpose of assessment is in issue or the fine or penalty involved does not exist ₹ 50 Lakhs which means a case where the case is determination of any issue in relation to the rate of the duty and valuation of the goods or differential duty, fine or penalty involved are more than ₹ 50 Lakhs, the Single Member Bench of this Tribunal have no jurisdic....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 472 - CESTAT KOLKATA
Maintainability of appeal - requirement of pre-deposit - section 35F of CEA - this is a second round of litigation - appellant had earlier complied with the requisite pre-deposit - HELD THAT:- Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of SUPER TYRES PVT. LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [2005 (1) TMI 119 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI], have held that once the appellant assessee has made compliance of the provisions of section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, it would be appropriate for the authorities concerned to hear the appeal without pre-deposit condition as the appellant had already complied with the provisions of section 35F and that should be the adequate amount of compliance with the provisions of section 35F. It would be appropriate to remand the matter to the lower appellate authority to decide the appeal on merits without insisting on any further pre-deposit - Appeal allowed by way of remand.
- 2020 (10) TMI 471 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Refund of excess paid excise duty - finalization of provisional assessment - Department had credited the same to the Consumer Welfare Fund, created under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - amount credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund on the ground that the incidence of excess duty has been passed on to the dealers of the excisable goods - Principles of Natural Justice - HELD THAT:- The amount in question, for which the refund claim was filed by the appellant was all along been reflected “as claims receivable from the government authorities”. The said entry made in the balance sheet for the period 31.03.2009 was all along reflected in the balance sheet prepared as on 31.03.2019. It is an admitted fact on record that the excess paid central excise duty by the appellant during the provisional assessment of the excisabl....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 438 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
CENVAT Credit - input services or not - appellant availed various services at Kandla Port as that of C&F, Testing, Sampling, etc. as were necessary in relation to the export of goods - rejection on the ground that the services which are availed only upto the place of removal are input services eligble to credit - contravention of the provisions of Rule 3 & 4 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 - period January 2008 to September 2008 - HELD THAT:- The availability of cenvat credit to the manufacture of goods floats from rule 3 (1)(2) of CCR Rules which provides that the manufacturer or producer of final product or provider of taxable service shall be allowed to take credit of any input service received by the manufacturer of final product or by the provider of output service. This rule clarifies that to avail Cevnat Credit the services rec....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 437 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Extended period of limitation - it has been argued by Revenue that the extended period of limitation has been invoked as the appellant neither disclosed the facts to the department voluntarily that they were undertaking the trading activity nor they paid the amount as per the provisions of Rule 6(3) ibid - reversal of CENVAT Credit - HELD THAT:- It was detected by the officers of the department on scrutiny of their records and this lead to the inference that the facts were suppressed and in the absence of detection by the officers of the department, they would have gone unnoticed. So far as suppression is concerned after going through the case records I do not find any suppression on the part of the appellants. As per records, audit of their records has been regularly done by the Central Excise Department during the years in question and ....... + More