Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise SCH Central Excise - SCH 2022 2022 2022 (8) 2022 (8) SCH Central Excise - 2022 (8) Central Excise - 2022 (8) TMI SCH This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Central Excise - SC Orders / Highlights - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 7 of 7 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 and Decision etc.

• 2022 (8) TMI 1374
  

  Condonation of inordinate delay of 272 days in filing the Review Petition - no satisfactory explanation given - HELD THAT:- No case for review of Order dated 8th March, 2021 is made out. Consequently, the review petition is dismissed on the ground of delay as well as on merits.

  ---

• 2022 (8) TMI 1101
  

  Valuation - physician samples were given free of cost by the distributors and not by the manufacturer - Determination of 'transaction value' - HELD THAT:- These appeals are disposed off in terms of the judgment rendered by this Court in COMMR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, SURAT VERSUS M/S SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDS. LTD. &v ORS. [2015 (12) TMI 670 - SUPREME COURT] where it was held that The transaction in question was between the assessee and the distributors. Between them, admittedly, price was charged by the assessee from the distributors. What ultimately distributors did with these goods is extraneous and could not be the relevant consideration to determine the valuation of excisable goods. When we find that price was charged by the assessee from the distributors, the Show Cause Notice is clearly founded on a wrong reason.

  Application disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (8) TMI 634
  

  Validity of Show Cause notice - Non adjudication / delayed adjustication of SCN for 11 years - CENVAT Credit - inputs - Menthol/Menthol flakes - Mentholised Oil (DMO) - Deterpinated Menthol & like inputs - invoices issued by the J&K and North East based units by showing supply of raw materials without supply of goods - It was held by the High Court that In the present case, no explanation has been offered in the written statement which can be held to be a plausible explanation for not adjudicating upon the Show Cause Notice within the time prescribed.

  HELD THAT:- In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, there are no reason to interfere.

  The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.

  ---

• 2022 (8) TMI 313
  

  Clandestine removal - undervaluation of Silico Manganese - charges merely on the basis of entries in private diary without other corroborative evidence of flow back of fund etc. - HELD THAT:- We decline to interfere in this appeal being devoid of merits. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

  ---

• 2022 (8) TMI 312
  

  Maintainability of appeal - HELD THAT:- There are no reason to deviate from the concurrent view taken including by the Appellate Tribunal.

  The civil appeal is dismissed.

  ---

• 2022 (8) TMI 229
  

  Maintainability of appeal - monetary amount involved in the appeal - Interpretation and validity of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - HELD THAT:- The Revenue should not have preferred the petition for special leave to appeal keeping in view the meager amount involved. In fact, the administrative expenses etc. may well be much higher than the tax involved.

  The petition for special leave to appeal is dismissed.

  ---

• 2022 (8) TMI 164
  

  Mode of refund - Rebate / refund to be made in Cash or to be re-credited into Cenvat Credit account - petitioner paid lesser duty on the domestic product and higher duty on the export product which was admittedly not payable - HELD THAT:- the case involves the factual aspects. - Section 140 and Section 142 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 are not examined and no comment have been made whether or not the appellant(s) assessees would be entitled to benefit under the said Sections.

  No question of law arises for consideration, and hence, the appeals are dismissed.

  ---

1