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 61 to 80 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.

  • 2015 (4) TMI 163

    Denial of rebate claim - Commissioner (Appeals) mainly on the ground that the rebate claims were sanctioned of duty paid on value which was more than transaction value and the claims should be restricted to duty paid on transaction value - Held that - Applicant has stated that while clearing the goods from factory they prepared ARE-1 No. 199/09-10 dtd. 27-10-2009 in the month of October 2009, when exchange rate was 47.70 Rs. Per US and ARE-1 No. ....... + More

  • 2015 (4) TMI 116

    Duty demand - Non submission of original and duplicate of ARE-1 duly certified by the Customs Authority - Loss of documents - Imposition of penalty under Rule 25 - Held that - Applicant had exported goods valuing ₹ 30,60,964.20 vide ARE-1 No. 1/09-10 dated 16.09.2009 under bond. Since no proof of export was submitted, Range Supdt. vide letter dated 22.03.2010 asked the exporter to submit proof of export. Applicant vide letter dated 25.07.20....... + More

  • 2015 (4) TMI 115

    Transfer of rebate claim to proper authority - Request denied as time barred - Held that - there are catena of judgment wherein it has been held that time limit to be computed from the date on which refund / rebate claim was originally filed. High Court and CESTA Tribunal, have held in precedent cases that original refund/rebate claim filed initially within prescribed time limit laid down in section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 and the claim r....... + More

  • 2015 (4) TMI 72

    Denial of refund claim - Unutilized CENVAT Credit - Notification No. 29/96 CE(NT) dated 03.09.96/96 - applicant appears to have not maintained any register for deemed credit of availed in respect of exported gods and further that they were eligible for deemed credit of availed in respect of exported goods and further that they were eligible for deemed credit of 50% of duty payable, however, they claim for 60% of it - Held that - applicants has in....... + More

  • 2015 (4) TMI 71

    Denial of rebate claim - basic requirement of Rule 18 ibid for considering rebate claim that the goods should be exported, has not been fulfilled by the claimant in as much as they have short shipped 92 cartons out of the total 535 cartons mentioned on the ARE-I No.33/04-05 dated 10.06.2004 - it was not possible to ascertain the exact quantity and quality of processed fabrics short shipped on the basis of available record - Held that - appellate ....... + More

  • 2015 (4) TMI 70

    Denial of rebate claim - adjudicating authority partly rejected rebate claims totally amounting to ₹ 60744/- on the ground that FOB value is less than the value shown in the ARE-1's because of addition of International Freight and Insurance in the assessable value which is not allowed under section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - applicant filed initially two appeals before appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), in time claiming inte....... + More

  • 2015 (4) TMI 31

    Duty drawback - Determination of brand rate - inputs not specified in the relevant SION - original authority vide impugned order-in-original fixed the brand rate @Rs.16.62 kgs with quantity restriction of 4.0000.06 kgs as against rate of ₹ 22.45 kgs of full' quantity claimed by the applicant - Held that - applicants failed to produce the original which was not-in possession of department, as per applicants own submission' at the tim....... + More

  • 2015 (4) TMI 30

    Condonation of delay - Denial of rebate claim - there is difference In weight of goods as per ARE-1/Invoice and Shipping Bill/Bill of Lading - correlation of goods covered in excise documents and export documents could not be established - respondents claimed the rebate of goods exported having weight as mentioned in ARE-1 and genuineness of such export is proved - Held that - appeal was filed before Commissioner (Appeals) after a delay of 45 day....... + More

  • 2015 (4) TMI 29

    Refund claim for the unutilized cenvat credit - jurisdiction of revision authority - period of limitation for filing of appeal - applicant filed this Revision Application after expiry of more than 9 months from date of receipt of impugned Order-in-Appeal - Exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 09.07.04 - Held that - revision application is filed on 21.8.2012 against the impugned orders-in-appeal No. 261/10 dated 07.12.2010. The said a....... + More

  • 2015 (4) TMI 28

    Denial of rebate claim - Violation of condition No.2(a) of Notification No.19/04-CE(NT) dated 6.9.04 - goods were not exported direct from factory of manufacture - Held that - If the Central Excise Officer deputed for verification of goods for export is satisfied about the identity of goods, its duty paid character and all other particulars given by exporter, he will endorse such form and permit export. The detailed procedure is given in para 8.1....... + More

  • 2015 (3) TMI 1041

    Denial of rebate claim - the applicant has exported the goods under Advance Licence - Held that - Supreme Court has held in the case of Mihir Textile Ltd. vs. CCE, Bombay 1997 (4) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA that exemption/benefit depending upon satisfaction certain conditions cannot be granted unless such conditions are complied with even such conditions are only directory. Hon'ble Supreme Court has also held in the case of M/s ITC Ltd. ....... + More

  • 2015 (3) TMI 1040

    Denial of rebate claim - Supply of goods to SEZ - Revenue denied claim on the ground that applicant did not supply the goods under Bill of Export - Held that - In terms of Board s Circular No. 29/2006-Cus., dated 27-12-2006, the supply from DTA to SEZ shall be eligible for claim of rebate under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 subject to fulfilment of conditions laid thereon. Government further observes that Rule 30 of SEZ Rules, 2006 prescr....... + More

  • 2015 (3) TMI 1039

    Denial of rebate claim - original/duplicate copies of AREs-1 could not be filed along with relevant proof of export - original authority ordered for re-credit in Cenvat account on the ground that transaction value in impugned cases is the lowest of three FOB values given in impugned AREs-1, Shipping Bills and BRCs - Held that - The FOB value declared on Shipping Bill is exactly same. The difference in BRC value is due to fluctuation in foreign ex....... + More

  • 2015 (3) TMI 1038

    Denial of rebate claim - non-submission of the disclaimer certificate - Bar of limitation - Held that - assessee filed rebate claim on 14-8-2007. The claim was not complete as required under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 and therefore a deficiency memo was issued on 30-8-2007. Assessee did not remove the deficiency in r/o ARE-1 No. 50/2007-08, dated 15-5-2007 as he did not submit disclaimer certificate issued by Shree Ram Gravio Marmo P....... + More

  • 2015 (3) TMI 998

    Denial of rebate claim - Bar of limitation - failure to export the goods directly from the factory of manufacturer as prescribed in Board's Circular No.294/10/97-Cx dated 30.01.1997 - Held that - On perusal of sample excise documents ARE-1, and Excise Invoices, it is noticed that in ARE-1 the destination is mentioned as name of vessel and there is a mention of relevant invoices. Further, in relevant invoices, there is mention of Vessel name, ....... + More

  • 2015 (3) TMI 997

    Claim of Interest on delayed sanction of rebate - Held that - The applicant filed appeal before Commissioner(Appeals) on the ground that the said claim was sanctioned without applicable interest to them inspite of their eligibility of interest in terms of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Commissioner(Appeals) rejected the appeal filed by the applicant. - on delayed payment of refund/rebate claim interest is payable after the expiry o....... + More

  • 2015 (3) TMI 996

    Denial of rebate claim - Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 r/w Notification No. 21/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-4-2004 - no manufacturing activity was carried out by the applicant on goods purchased to qualify for rebate benefit in terms of Notification No. 21/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-4-2004 - held that - rebate under Notification No. 21/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-4-2004 is admissible on the duty paid on excisable goods used in manufacture or pr....... + More

  • 2015 (3) TMI 995

    Denial of rebate claim - Education Cess and SHE Cess paid from the Cenvat Credit of Basic Central Excise duty is not permissible under proviso to Rule 3(7) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Rule 3(4) - Held that - as per Rule 3(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, Cenvat credit may be utilized for payment of any duty of excise on any final product. As such Cenvat credit of BED paid on inputs can be utilized for payment of any duty of excise on a....... + More

  • 2015 (3) TMI 994

    Denial of partial rebate claim - applicant exporter was sanctioned rebate claims by the original authority to the extent of duty payable on F.O.B. value as shown in respective shipping bills, which has been taken as transaction value in terms of provisions of Section 4(3)(c)(iii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Held that - original authority has found the FOB value declared in Shipping Bills as the transaction value in terms of Section 4 of Cen....... + More

  • 2015 (3) TMI 953

    Denial of rebate claim - rebate claims rejected on the ground that M/s Ess Dee Aluminium Ltd., Kolkata is not the proper claimant to file rebate claims - Commissioner held that' M/s IFL & M/s Ess Dee Aluminium Ltd (Claimant) are not two different companies but the same legal entity - Held that - respondent has taken a contradictory stand. On the one hand they-'are contending that IFL ceased to exist legally and physically after 30.9.1....... + 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.