Tax Management India. Com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals Articles SMS News Highlights
Case Laws
Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise
Citation -
Order by


Central Excise - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 69255 Records

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1046 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. TVS Srichakra Limited Versus The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise,

    CENVAT credit - Reversal of credit on capital goods - lease back of goods - contemporaneous leasing back through rental agreement - whether the leasing back amounts to removal of capital goods from the factory premises of the petitioner or not? - Rule 3(5) of the CCR - Held that - In any adjudicatory process, the authority has a duty to deal with every material and relevant contention raised by the disputant. This alone will ensure that decision-....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1044 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Arihant Udyog, Vinayak Inds., Murthy Gopalkrishnan Nadar, Nageshwar Enterprises, CCE Nashik And Shri Samart Ashok Bhutada Versus to 4. CCE Nashik Respondent, Nageshwar Enterprises

    SSI Exemption - case of the department is that though the appellant s factories are located in rural area but major process of manufacturing is carried out by the job workers who are not located in rural areas but in urban areas - Held that - As per the activity the appellant is only carrying out affixation of brand on the tools i.e. spanner by embossing/ engraving. This process alone does not amount to manufacture - As regards other processes wh....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1031 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    M/s. Bombay Snuff Pvt. Ltd,, Versus Union of India, and Others

    Refund of excess duty paid - duty paid under protest - time limitation - Section 11B of the Central Excise Act - whether the appellant was entitled to refund of excise duty paid from 1st April, 1989 to the end of February, 1994? - Held that - No doubt, if the appellant claims refund under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, the burden to establish such claim shall be upon the appellant, who has to lead evidence to the satisfaction of the autho....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1030 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    The Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Satara Versus Settlement Commission, Additional Branch, Custom & Central Excise, Mumbai, Allied Ferromelt Pvt. Ltd.

    Maintainability of application before Settlement Commission - Clandestine removal - parallel invoices - only contention of petitioner is that the Settlement Commission in this case completely bypassed the mandatory requirements stipulated in law and entertained the application - Principles of Natural Justice - Held that - It is evident from the communication, copy of which is at Exhibit C at page 80 dated 7th January, 2005 that this Commissionera....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1029 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    M/s. Annapoorna Re-rolling (P) Ltd. Versus The Customs Excise and Service Tax, Appellate Tribunal, The Commissioner of Central Excise

    Reversal of CENVAT credit - Rule 11(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Assessee availed SSI exemption under N/N. 8/2003-C.E., dated 01.03.2003 - case of Revenue is that though the assessee had availed the SSI exemption, it had failed to pay the amount of duty under Rule 11(2) of CCR, 2004, equivalent to Cenvat credit availed by them on inputs and finished goods lying in stock as on 31.03.2005 and 31.03.2006 - whether the demand of duty equivalent ....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1028 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

    M/s Colour Flex Laminates Ltd, Shri Pradeep K Patel Versus C.C.E. & S.T. -Ahmedabad

    Extended period of limitation - Valuation - includibility of amortization of cost of dies/moulds/tools in assessable value - Held that - there were conflicting judgments on the includability of cost of moulds supplied free of costs by the buyers in value of finished goods manufactured using such dies/tooling/moulds. The dispute was finally resolved by the Larger Bench judgment rendered in the case of Mutual Industries Ltd 2000 (3) TMI 74 - CEGAT,....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1027 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

    M/s Anjani Industries Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Surat

    Benefit of N/N. 6/2002-CE - Scouring Machine falling under Chapter 8451.10.10 or milling machine? - case of appellant is that the intention of the said notification is to grant exemption to both milling machine and to scouring machine and not to a combined milling and scouring machine - Held that - The appellants have produced an expert opinion which clearly states that the scouring machine is significantly different from milling machine and he h....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1026 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

    C.C.E. & S.T. -Surat Versus Shree Sidhi Vinayak Silk Mills

    100 EOU - Valuation - clearance of 765539.74 L. Mtrs of processed MMF without payment of duty - whether proviso to Section 3(1) of CEA, 1944 will be applicable or Section 3(1) of CEA 1944 would be applicable? - Held that - Since the present case is for the period after 11.05.2001, the issue is settled against the assesee by the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Maral Oveseas Ltd. 2016 (4) TMI 771 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , where it was held that....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1025 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

    Laxmi Steel Traders, Niranjbhai Kantilala, Dilipbhai K Shah Versus CCE –Bhavnagar

    Clandestine removal - shortage of finished goods and scrap - contention of appellant is that the documentary evidence submitted by them has not been considered by the first appellate authority and there is no finding on the documentary evidence produced before him - principles of natural justice - Held that - there is no finding on documents submitted by the appellants in their defence - Besides, the documentation which has been submitted before ....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1024 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

    M/s Vyas Shantilal Jethalal Sons Co., Shri Mahendra S Vyas, Shri Sanjay M Vyas Versus CCE & ST – Vadodara

    Scope of remand - Clandestine removal - branded bidis - Revenue went in appeal before this Tribunal, but, filed only one appeal against M/s. Vyas Shantilal Jethalal & Sons Co., Umeta. No appeal was filed against the dropping of demand issued to M/s Sanjay M Vyas and against Shri Mahendra S. Vyas - Held that - It is clear from the remand order that no appeal was filed against the other appellants except for M/s Vyas S. J. & Sons Co., Umeta....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1023 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    M/s Kiroloskar Oil Engines Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III

    Valuation - includibility - whether 50 advertisement expenses borne by dealer with reference to sale of the finished goods by the appellant should be included in the assessable value or otherwise? - Held that - the 50 advertisement expenses are borne by the dealer. Since this amount is not flowing to the manufacturer, it cannot be said that there is an extra consideration - there is no question of inclusion of any amount, which is not flowing to ....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1022 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Tata Motors Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, LTU, Mumbai

    Refund of accumulated CENVAT credit - appellant-assessee had conceded not to claim this amount from the department - Held that - dispute is 15 years old it would be better to close the issue - once having conceded that item N. 3 and 4 (of the table) needs decent burial, appellant should not have exhumed the issue by filing the refund claim before the authorities - refund rightly rejected. - Secondly, it has to be noticed that before the Tribunal ....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1021 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Detco Textiles Pvt Ltd, amesh Babulal Ranka, Detco Polyesters Pvt Ltd, Banwarilal S

    Clandestine manufacture and removal - it was alleged that appellant were clandestinely receiving texturized yarn from M/s DPPL, and after dying the same and sent it back to M/s DPPL, Silvassa - allegation based on record of the Godown Keeper of M/S Purohit Clearing Agency - whether all goods cleared are recorded in register of Purohit Clearing Agency and are dyed yarn? - Held that - unless Revenue is able to establish that the entire yarn listed ....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1020 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Dhanlaxmi TM T Bars Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CE And Customs Aurangabad

    CENVAT credit - inputs/capital goods - MS. Angles, HR Coils, HR Plates, CI Casting etc - Held that - the Chartered Engineer, who is expert in the field, has clearly stated that the items procured by appellant (in this appeal) were used for supporting structure of capital goods and also for pollution control equipment - The said Chartered Engineer s certificate being not controverted by any evidence - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1019 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Commissioner of Central Excise Kolhapur Versus Shree T.K. Warana SSK Ltd.

    CENVAT Credit - transportation of finished goods from the factory premises - Held that - Tribunal in respondent own case Tatyasaheb Kore Warana S.S.K. Ltd. Versus C.E.E., Kolhapur 2015 (7) TMI 506 - CESTAT MUMBAI has held that Appellant is entitled to take CENVAT credit on outward transportation service in the case of transportation of levy sugar upto the railway station and transportation of export sugar upto the port - credit allowed - decided ....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1018 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Western Coalfields Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CE, Cus. & ST Nagpur

    Refund claim - duty paid under protest - Held that - Protest in any form to the authorities is to be accepted unless until it is explicitly rejected - In the absence of any such correspondent from Revenue, the finding of the lower authorities that this matter cannot be considered as an intimation for payment of duty under protest seems to be belated and mis-directed, as during the relevant period duty liability on clearance of goods as per provis....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1017 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    PRS Permacel Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane I

    CENVAT credit - capital goods - modular partitions, flame proof partitions, Quartz plate, verticals panel, non-walkable ceiling, PCQI door etc. - Held that - Similar issue came up before the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v, Rane Brake Lining Ltd. 2011 (2) TMI 415 - CESTAT, CHENNAI , where Tribunal held in favor of the assessee therein where similar items of pre-fabricated structures were used for fabrication of cold room ....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1016 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Remi Elektrotechnik Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Thane II

    Refund of accumulated CENVAT credit - outward transportation of finished goods upto 31.03.2008 - rejection on the ground that the appellant being not able to produce sales invoice or purchase order - validity of SCN - Held that - Revenue authorities were aware that the refund of ₹ 89,965/- is in respect of service tax paid on outward transportation charges. It is also on record that the appellant had produced the original GAR-7 challans und....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1015 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

    M/s Super Fashion Fasteners Pvt. Ltd., M/s Omega Zippers Pvt. Ltd., Shri Hitin Malhotra, Director, Shri Ashok Kumar Malhotra, Director, Shri Anupam Mehta, Director, Shri Gulshan Kumar Bhatia, Shri Amit Mehta, Shri Umesh Gupta, Shri Ramandeep Singh, Shri Satish Kumar Bansal, and Shri Shailesh Kumar Kharbanda Versus Principal Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-I

    Clandestine manufacture and removal - parallel invoices - demand based on electricity consumption - Held that - the individual liability of duty alleged in the SCN and proposed to be recovered individually from M/s Super and M/s Omega has been arrived at on the basis of presumption that the clandestine activity was in the ratio of the consumption of electricity - Such a proposition is absurd and the quantification of individual liability is total....... + More

  • 2018 (4) TMI 1014 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    M/s. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST And Central Excise, Pune-II

    CENVAT credit - Diesel Hydraulic Shunting Locomotive - time limitation - Held that - The appellant have availed the credit in the month of June 2013 and thereafter they intimated to the department regarding the availment of credit on locomotive vide their letter dt. 6.8.2013 thereafter some correspondence were taken place between the department and the appellant - it is clear that they have not suppressed any fact as regard availment of credit of....... + More

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version