Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise 2007 2007 This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA Law of Competition 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-- 2025 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 >= 2 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 - Case Laws

Showing 301 to 320 of 2676 Records

• 2007 (11) TMI 171
  

  Demand of duty on waste and scrap of capital goods - revenue demand duty on the impugned goods (scrap) considering it as final products manufactured from the inputs - goods cleared are metal scrap and an item of used filter coil - assessee is engaged in the manufacture of various chemicals and cannot be held to have manufactured the metal scrap or filter coil – demand imposed invoking 3(5A) of cenvat credit rules is not justified

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 170
  

  Received the inputs under cover of dealer’s invoice from its sister unit on book adjustment & not on sale – credit denied - inputs received had suffered duty & no one else had availed credit of the same - held that once the duty paid nature of the goods wasn’t under challenge & invoice contained the details prescribed by the Board, the credit had to be allowed - appellants had satisfied all the conditions of not. 58/97 so sale is not necessary to avail credit – so they are eligible for credit

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 169
  

  Reversed the credit from RG-23A Part-II account under protest and duly recorded therein - suo motu recredited the same amount - appellant again debited the said amount under protest as duly recorded in their letter – adj. authority didn’t consider the case law according to which ‘endorsement of protest on TR-6 challan sufficient compliance of payment under protest, bar of limitation is not applicable’ - rejection of the refund claim on limitation is set aside and the matter is remanded back

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 168
  

  Credit denied, on the ground that respondent failed to produce Sales Tax Form ST-3, presuming that inputs have not been received in factory - Comm (A) examined various evidences (such as invoices, receipts of the inputs statutory records, clearance of the finished goods on payment of duty and availment of payment through Account Payee Cheques by the consignor of inputs) of the respondent that they received inputs at their factory – so credit allowed by Comm. (A) is justified

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 165
  

  Credit on wire rods used for drawing of wire – credit denied holding that impugned process is not a manufacture - Circular No. 831/8/2006 made retrospective amendment in Rule16 - purpose of the amendment is to regularize credit taken at the input stage (on wire rod) - wire drawing units, which had paid a sum equal to duty leviable on drawn wire, would be eligible to avail the credit of duty paid on inputs and utilize the same for payment of duty on drawn wire – hence credit allowed

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 164
  

  Valuation of goods cleared to DTA by EOU - value of DTA clearances aren’t necessarily to be same as that of value of export - value of exports could be different for different customers, especially if the exports are to different countries - value adopted for payment of duty for DTA clearances is the T. V. & not a manipulated one – so, the transaction value declared by appellant can’t be rejected – order of taking FOB price of identical goods exported as value of goods sold in DTA is rejected

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 163
  

  Appellants received some extra amount as bonus – price variation clause - duty paid on normal price - appellant contends that since the bonus received does not constitute a part of the normal price, no extra duty is payable – held that in the event of supply of inferior material, the assessment is required to be made on reduced value and for superior material appellants are required to pay duty on higher value inclusive of bonus - Appeal is dismissed except for setting aside the penalty amount

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 161
  

  Uphold by the adj. authority that the appellant had violated the provisions of Ex. Not.1 /95 while bringing in the capital goods, without permission of the Development Commissioner - as if, the Development Commissioner, who is in charge of export oriented unit, has exonerated the EOU from the charges of violation of the foreign trade policy, the same has to be respected by all – demand is not justified - appeal filed by the revenue is rejected

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 160
  

  A fire accident took place in the factory premises of the appellant which resulted in damage to finished goods - facts were confirmed by the report of the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory - held that fire which took place is an unavoidable accident, remission requires to be considered and allowed if the appellant has not received the duty element as compensation from their Insurance Company - appeal is allowed by way of remand to consider the remission

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 158
  

  Procedural non-compliance – declaration of input lying with appellant not filed properly but application filed for new registration – non-compliance of rule 9A - Appellant having suffered duty on the input and that not being contradicted by any cogent evidence on record - transitional provision introduced through Rule 9A of CC Rules has not taken away right to set off the input credit against the duty on final product - procedural irregularity should not prevent the Appellant to take credit

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 157
  

  Assessee have got drawing and designing for automatic sampler and other machines done by out sourcing the said design work - They have also manufactured and supplied some of the parts and components of the designed structure - held that designing charge does not relate to the excisable goods manufactured and supplied by the appellants but relates to the whole structure of which parts are only made by them, such charges for designing and drawing cannot be included, in the assessable value

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 156
  

  M/s. STS were related to the assessee - price charged in the subject transactions was not accepted & lower authorities invoked Rule 9 and the higher price charged by M/s. STS from their customer was adopted for valuation - sales had been made to related person as well as to independent buyers - so the price of the goods sold by the holding company to their dealer was not to be adopted as basis for valuation of the goods sold by the assessee to the holding company – Rule 9 not applicable

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 155
  

  Assessee had destroyed credit availed inputs rejected on the basis of poor quality - Where the credit has been taken or utilized wrongly or has been erroneously refunded, the same along with interest shall be recovered from the manufacturer - In present case, it cannot be held that the appellants had taken credit wrongly when some of the inputs were found to be of poor quality after receipt of the same - so demand of interest affirmed in the impugned order is not sustainable - appeal allowed

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 154
  

  Manufacturers of “Nylon Filament Yarn” - durable packing materials like paper cartons and paper tubes are used for packing product before its clearance from the factory - where the packing material was durable and the arrangement between the seller and the buyer was for return of the material by the buyer, the cost of the material would be excluded from the assessable value of the excisable goods under Section 4(4)(d)(i), whether or not there was actual return of the packing material

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 152
  

  Appellants used several duty paid inputs and after taking credit, Appellants manufactured Accinox ZC by processing those inputs - In the process small quantities of waste is generated which has been destroyed by them by burning - Appellants have destroyed the after giving due intimation to the Department - fact that two small consignments were cleared on payment of duty does not change the nature of waste which was of no use to any one – so demand of duty on such waste is not justified

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 151
  

  Granulated Slag generated in the course of manufacturing Cement is not excisable – in the similar case Department’s appeal against the said decision of the Tribunal has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court - in view of fact that the issue stands settled in favour of the Appellants, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 147
  

  Revenue contended that consequent to merger of the transferor company, the transferee (appellant co.) would not be entitled for credit - liability to pay duty has arisen before the merger - differential duty was paid after merger - fact of merger cannot obliterate or extinguish the rights and liabilities of the transferor company - appellant is entitled to the credit on the duty paid on the basis of the supplementary invoice - appellant company gets all the rights of the transferor company also

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 146
  

  SSI exemption -Appellant got cement manufactured from 6 grinding units by supplying them clinker and then purchasing the cement manufactured by them – revenue’s plea that clearances of all the six grinding units should be taken as the clearances of the appellants is not justified because grinding units are independent as they have their own existence, labour, finance etc. – so grinding units are entitled for exemption not. 8/01 & 9/01 – and appellants entitled for the benefit of Not. 3/01

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 144
  

  Excise officers intercepted a truck loaded with 205 thans of man made fabrics in transit - removed the goods without the cover of invoice – clandestine removal – duty deposited before issue of SCN – Penalty equal to amount of duty not justified so penalty u/s 11AC reduced to 25% of amount of duty - deposited the duty before issue of show cause notice and the quantum of fine is more than the duty amount so redemption fine is reduced from 40,000 to.20,000

  ---

• 2007 (11) TMI 143
  

  Issue involved in this case is regarding the confirmation of the demand of duty involved in the capital goods lost during the fire accident in the factory premises of the appellant - no warrant to reverse the input credit taken in this case – Chartered Accountant Certificate indicating that insurance claim was received for damaged goods only & not for all, cannot be discarded without producing contrary opinion of another expert – demand & penalty not imposable

  ---

1 ....121314151617181920........ 134