Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com   
Case Laws
Home Case Index Central Excise



Citation -

Showing 1 to 20 of 58781 Records

Central Excise - Case Laws


2016 (2) TMI 330 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

M/s. Sharp Menthol India Ltd. Versus C.C.E Delhi-I And Vice-Versa

Area based exemption - misuse of the scheme - manufacturer of menthol located in Jammu & Kathua - notification no. 56/2002-CE - Revenue contended that these units are actually manufacturing menthol flakes i.e. (terpene /menthol / DMO) only in small quantities but were showing their production in huge quantities. Thereafter, only invoices showing payment of excise duty were issued without actually manufacturing and clearing the goods. For the .....

2016 (2) TMI 329 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

M/s Riba Textiles Ltd, Shri Ravinder Garg Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax, Rohtak

100 EOU - diversion of imported material - Revenue has concluded that the suppliers were engaged in diversion of imported goods without payment of duty and appellant also issued CT 3 certificate to the suppliers to procure goods without payment of duty which have been diverted to the open market on the instructions of the appellants by the supplier. Therefore, the appellants are liable to pay duty along with interest and penalties on both the app.....

2016 (2) TMI 328 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

M/s Saco Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur

Shortages found during the course of physical verification - demanding duty along with interest and imposing penalty - Held that - As the learned Counsel for the appellant has conceded the liability of duty, therefore duty demand is confirmed. With regard to the interest, find that appellant has paid the duty within a month of investigation, no interest is payable by the appellant. BR BR Coming to the imposition of penalty on the appellant as gon.....



Appropriation of the rebate amount - Appropriation made against the liability for interest relating to prior period of their Bombay unit - lack of notice to the appellant - Held that - The appellant was required to be given notice before adjustment of any amount from the rebate for subsequent period, Section 142 read with section 11, being the special power of recovery (garnishee proceedings). BR BR Scope of notification number 68 of 1963 as amen.....

2016 (2) TMI 326 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

M/s Him Engineers India Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh

Duty concession under notification no. 50/03 CE dated 10/6/2003 w.e.f. 7/11/2005 denied - eligibility for the exemption based on the expansion of installed capacity by 25 per cent or more - Held that - We find that from the letter dated 17/2/2009 issued by the Deputy Director of Industries District Solan Himachal Pradesh that the revised capacity after substantial expansion has been above 25 of bonnet assembly consisting of 52 parts and sheet met.....

2016 (2) TMI 325 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

M/s. The Empire Safe Co. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi

Demanding duty along with interest and imposing penalty thereon - Held that - We have perused the impugned order in detail and in the impugned order, the adjudicating authority has not given any independent finding to arrive at the conclusion but merely copied the finding of the earlier adjudication order and hold that clearance of both units can be clubbed and duty can be demanded accordingly, which is not permissible in law as the adjudicating .....

2016 (2) TMI 288 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax, Panchkula Versus Sainsons Paper Industries Ltd.

Demand of Interest - Refund by taking credit of the amount in their cenvat account and thereby taking a suo motto refund of pre-deposit - Held that - As per the appellate order dated 22.6.2007 the pre-deposit amount has to be refunded to the respondent. The act of the respondents in taking refund of the amount by crediting the amount in their cenvat credit account, is only a procedural lapse. After taking credit, the respondents have declared the.....

2016 (2) TMI 287 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

M/s. Ultra Tech Cement Ltd. Versus CCE & S.T. -Indore

Ineligible CENVAT Credit availed on capital goods - various machinery and items purchased and used in setting up of thermal power plant in their factory.- Held that - The appellants purchased capital goods, paid for the same and received under due documents in their premises. The supplier had another set of contracts for designing, erection, commissioning and civil/structural works. On all these service contracts, the contractor has paid service .....

2016 (2) TMI 286 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Shree Balaji Rollings Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Goa

Discharge of duty liability from August, 1997 to March, 2000 based upon the annual capacity of production - whether the demand raised by the show caused notice consequent to the determination of production capacity are correct or otherwise? - Held that - It can be seen from the reproduced letter that Commissioner of Central Excise, Goa had finally determined the annual capacity of production. It is also to be noted that this letter is dated 13.03.....

2016 (2) TMI 285 - CESTAT MUMBAI


Demand of of interest and penalty - Extended period of limitation invoked - Held that - In absence of any such voluntary payment, recovery of the unpaid duty would not have been possible. In that view of the matter, we do not find the case would fall under sub-section (2B) of Section 11A of the Act. Sub-section (2B) of Section 11A of the Act applies in a case where there is voluntary payment of unpaid duty before issuance of show cause notice und.....

2016 (2) TMI 284 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

M/s Emsons Organics Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh-II

Sales tax permissible for deduction for valuation under Central Excise Law - Held that - In the present case, we find the whole issue cropped up during the course of scrutiny of purchase invoices by the audit party and certain ledger accounts maintained by the appellants. It is not disputed that the present demand arose because of the difference between the sales tax amount collected by the appellant from the buyer and actually paid to the State .....

2016 (2) TMI 283 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Nirlon Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-V And Vica-Versa

Manufacture - whether the items i.e. impure dowtherm diphyl; old and damaged PTA scrap, wash water - 50 concentration of lactum, old and used sludge oil; old and used all types of oil, spin finish oil and old assorted bearings cleared from the factory premises of the assessee are liable to duty? - Held that - It is on record that the items on which duty demands are made are arising during the course of manufacture of the final products for the pe.....

2016 (2) TMI 254 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Suyash Chemicals Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I

Cenvat credit on the basis of the endorsed bill of entry - Is endorsed bill of entry a valid document for claiming cenvat credit? - Held that - In this case it is not disputed the receipt of the material and duty paid on that. Further as find that in the case of Akzo Nobel Coatings (India) Ltd. vs. CCE, Bangalore reported in 2013 2012 (11) TMI 1021 - CESTAT BANGALORE the appellant is entitled for cenvat credit on the basis of endorsed bill of ent.....

2016 (2) TMI 253 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Godfrey Philips India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-IV

Duty demand on waste/scrap of packing materials cleared from the factory - Held that - The dispute in the present appeal is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of International Tobacco Co. Ltd. vs. CCE, Ghaziabad 2003 (10) TMI 171 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI wherein held that there is force in the submissions of the learned Advocate that no process of manufacture has been taken by them so as to attract the Central Excise duty on .....


Bharat Steel Rolling Mills (Unit-I) , Muzaffarnagar Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-I

Duty under the Compounded Levy Scheme confirmed - refusal of payment of duty under normal scheme - Held that - We hold that under the facts and circumstances, the appellant had not made/expressed option for paying tax for the financial year 1998-99 under the compounded levy scheme. As such, no tax can be demanded under the provisions of Section 3A read with Rule 96ZP(3). We accordingly set aside the impugned order on the issue of abatement also. .....

2016 (2) TMI 251 - CESTAT MUMBAI

MITC Rolling Mills P. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik

Demand of duty on the goods clandestinely removed from the factory premises - Held that - There is enough evidence to indicate that the goods were cleared clandestinely without payment of duty by appellant No.1 to various purchasers. On that account there is no case; imposition of penalty on Shri Champsi M. Shah, find that appellant has no case and it has to be held that the first appellate authority as well as the adjudicating authority are corr.....

2016 (2) TMI 250 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Namdhari Industrial Traders Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax, Ludhiana

Duty liability - Manufacturing activity or not - activity of cutting and welding of steel angles - galvanizing steel items - Job work - Held that - Regarding the demand of duty from the appellant for galvanizing work done by the job worker, the original authority stated that certain processes like cutting welding were done before they are sent to galvanizing. This observation has not been supported by the original authority with source. Further, .....

2016 (2) TMI 249 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Mahadev Pharmaceuticals Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, Chandigarh

Area based exemption - notification No. 50/03-CE dated 10.6.2003 - denial of benefit as the appellant was not having electricity connection or DG set installed at the time of investigation - demanding duty along with interest and imposing penalty - Held that - From the perusal of various documents, we find that appellants have installed machines which are evidence of manufacture of final products and they have license to manufacture from Drugs Co.....

2016 (2) TMI 248 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

M/s Haldiram India Pvt. Ltd., Shri ML Agarwal, Director Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi

SSI Exemption - Interpretation of notification 8/2002-CE dated 01/3/2002 existed prior to the Notification which came into effect on 01/3/2003 - suppression of facts - bifurcation of exempted goods to two categories - Penalty imposed - Held that - On perusal of both notifications we find that the clause in the Notification pertaining to calculation of aggregate value in regard to exempted goods is clearly worded and does not give reason for any d.....

2016 (2) TMI 218 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Galaxy Plywood Inds. P Ltd. Versus CCE, Panchkula

Classification of plasticized plywood - classifiable under 4410.90 OR under heading 4408.90 - Held that - The chapter heading 44.08 specifically speaks about plywood, veneered panels and similar laminated wood. Whereas, the chapter heading 44.10 speaks about articles of wood not elsewhere specified. Undeniably, the impugned product does not fall into article of wood . So the product which is plasticized plywood is classifiable under chapter 44.08.....


what is new what is new





More Options


|| About us || Contact us || Feed Back || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map || ||

© [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Website