Tax Management India. Com
                            Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals SMS News Articles Highlights
Case Laws
Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise CGOVT Central Excise - CGOVT This
Citation -
Order by


Central Excise - Central Government - Case Laws

Showing 21 to 40 of 879 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.

  • 2016 (7) TMI 434

    Claim of rebate/ refund - input stage rebate - export of goods - The adjudicating authority rejected all the rebate claims of the respondent holding that they failed to get the input output ratio approved in respect of Menthol Crystals as required under Notification No. 21/2004-CE(NT) dated 06109.2004 and rebate claim were not admissible to them as they had failed to fulfill the conditions of Notification ibid. - Commissioner (Appeals) allowed th....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 433

    Claim of rebate/refund - export of goods from DTA unit to SEZ units - initially applicant cleared excisable goods without payment of duty under UT-I Bond to the SEZ Unit - However, it was found that the applicants have subsequently paid the duty on the said clearances through CENVAT account by making consolidated debit entry at the end of the respective months of clearances and claimed rebate of duty paid on such clearances. - Department rejected....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 432

    Claim of rebate/ refund - export of goods on payment of duty through third party - Certain amount of rebate claim was rejected on the ground that the relevant export documents are not matching as far as declaration of name of exporter is concerned which is a contravention of Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004. - the name of exporter is declared/mentioned as M/S. Govardhan Poly Plast Pv....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 431

    Claim of rebate/refund - Procedure of A.R.E.-1 followed instead of A.R.E-2 as contended by the department - exported the goods on payment of duty - Rule 18 of Central Excise Rule, 2002 read with Notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) dated 06.0912004 - Department found that, goods were exported by availing benefit under Notification No. 21/2004-CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004 and Notification No, 43/2001-CE(NT) dated 26.06.2001 as certified by them at Sr. No. 3....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 356

    Rebate/ refund claim - export of goods - Jurisdiction - The said rebate claim was rejected by Assistant Commissioner(Rebate), Central Excise, Raigad on the ground that Maritime Commissioner Raigad, have no jurisdiction over the exports made from the ICD Sabarmati, Ahmedabad. - Held that - Government observes that Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly held that in terms of Notification 19/2004 CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004 which provides the procedure for ....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 355

    Condonation of delay in filing appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) - he rebate claim was partly rejected by the original authority on the ground that the assessable value was more than FOB value and rebate claim is admissible only to extent of duty payable on FOB value. - Held that - The Commissioner (Appeals) has considered this aspect of delay in detail and observed that the reason advanced by the applicant was not a sufficient cause which cou....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 354

    Condonation of delay in filing revision application - Rejection of rebate/ rebate claim over and above FOB value - export of goods - ground of dis-allowance of appeal is that the assessable value was more than correct FOB value and therefore, there was excess payment of duty and excess rebate could not sanctioned by the adjudicating authority to the extent of said excess payment of ₹ 1,16,603/- - Held that - On perusal of the same, Governme....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 353

    Rebate/ refund - export of goods - adjudicating authority allowed the same to be taken as Cenvat Credit under respective head as the duty was debited originally in the Cenvat account and ordered rejection of ₹ 2,19/253/- as inadmissible claim in respect of 4 number of ARE-Is. - Held that - Government observes that the part rebate claims of ₹ 261381/- was rejected on ground that there is huge variation of weight between ARE-Is, and Air....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 352

    Rejection of rebate/ refund claim - discrepancies in export/excise documents - the part rebate claims of ₹ 261381/- was rejected on ground that there is huge variation of weight between AREs-1 and Air Way Bills and as such, it cannot be proved beyond doubt that the goods under the said AREs1 have been exported. - Held that - Government notes that neither before original authority nor before Commissioner (Appeals), the applicant could give a....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 302

    Rejection of rebate claim - export of goods - conditions stipulated in Notification No. 19/2004 CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004 read with Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 were not fulfilled. - Held that - Government notes that as regard to discrepancies mentioned at Sr. No. (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) and (vii), the appellate authority has given detailed findings. - Government notes that with regard to deficiency shown at Sr. No. (V) regarding valuat....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 301

    Rebate claim of duty - export of goods under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - claim rejected on the ground that the applicant have not submitted documentary evidence/records to establish the actual receipt of inputs and its utilization in the manufacture of the finish goods exported under A.R.E-2 - Held that - On perusal of sample copies of documents submitted by the applicant, Government observes that invoices raised by M/S. Janta Glass L....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 233

    Demand of duty on export of goods without payment of duty - export of Linear Alkyl Benzene (LAB) under UT-I for export under the provision of Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - it was noticed that 7.921 M.T. of LAB were short shipped/not exported by the applicants. - Condonation of delay in filing revision application due the reason the applicant was pursing the matter with the wrong forum - Held that - As such after excluding time elapse be....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 232

    Rebate / refund claim on export of goods - non-realization of foreign exchange - exporter has not submitted (BRCs) in respect of export clearances - Commissioner (Appeals) observed that submission of BRCs have not been envisaged as precondition for grant of rebate under Notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004 read with Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. - Held that - It is a fact on record that the stipulated period of one year f....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 231

    Loss of goods during manufacturing - Procedure of Remission of duty not followed - Rule 21 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Cenvat Credit on inputs - On scrutiny of ER-I returns for the month of April 2009 to March2010, it has been observed that the respondent has shown some quantity of Denatured Rectified Spirit as process loss after production of the finished goods. The respondent has not mentioned any reason for this process loss in their ER-I ....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 230

    Rebate of duty of input stage on export of goods - Rule 18 - excisable goods were cleared for export by them in respect of ARE-2, without obtaining prior permission of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise to the effect in terms of Notification No. 21/2004CE(NT) dated 06.092004 - Held that - The applicant cannot claim the input rebate as a matter of right when he has failed to follow the provisions of Notification No. 21/2004-CE(NT) withou....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 229

    Rebate claim of duty paid on exported goods under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - applicant failed to follow procedure of self sealing as provided in para 3(a)(xi) of the Notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) dated 06.09.2004 and failed to submit triplicate and quadruplicate ARE-I to range Superintendent vide Order-in-Original No.22/10-11/ACC Rebate/Raigad dated 07.0412010. - Held that - if goods are cleared from a factory for export under ....... + More

  • 2016 (7) TMI 228

    Recovery of Rebate/ refund granted earlier - input stage rebate under Rule 18 had been granted to the respondent based on input output declaration which was subsequently found to be incorrect - respondent had mis-declared that the waste obtained would not be reprocessed/recycled further to obtain menthol which led to wrong fixation of the input output norm 1.250 kg DMO 1.000 kg menthol by the Division Office which effect was required to be fixed ....... + More

  • 2016 (6) TMI 995

    Rebate / refund of duty on goods supplied to SEZ units - admissibility of refund claim of jute cess paid on goods supplied to SEZ units - period of limitation - in supersession of the earlier claim of refund, subsequently the applicant submitted revised claim of ₹ 13,36,029/- The contention of the department in this regard was that as the- applicant has submitted their initial refund claim on 04.08.2009 hence their refund claim for the peri....... + More

  • 2016 (6) TMI 994

    Rebate / refund claim - export goods - receipt in Indian Rupee through Vostro Account - claim rejected to the extent of remittance not received in foreign currency - The applicant submits that the order of the respondent is erroneous and legally untenable in as much as there is no condition that rebate of duty on exports would be allowed only if the export proceeds are realized in convertible foreign exchange. The applicant submits that Rule 18 o....... + More

  • 2016 (6) TMI 993

    Refund of un-utilized cenvat credit - rejection of refund to the extent transferred from other unit - Condonation of delay - export of Indian Mouth Freshner falling under chapter Sub-Heading No.21069020 - The Commissioner (Appeals) decided the case in favour of respondent assessee as there was no confirmed demand of ₹ 1,44,16,817/- against the respondent for violation of Rule 10 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. Now the Department has filed this ....... + 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.