Feedback   New User   Subscription   Demo   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
Case Laws
Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise HC Central Excise - HC
Citation -
Order by


Central Excise - High Court - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 8879 Records

  • 2018 (3) TMI 852 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai I Versus M/s. Taj Sats Air Catering Ltd., Sky Gourmet Catering Services Pvt. Ltd., Mr. Ganesh Chaturvedi, Mr. Manish Chiranewal

    Manufacture or service - catering services, according to the Revenue, amount to manufacture of edible preparation and supply of food preparation/materials to various airlines, served on board of aircrafts - Held that - A party should not be left guessing nor a higher court speculating as to whether the tribunal decided the matter by holding that the activity amounts to manufacture and yet not sustained the demand in terms of the adjudication orde....... + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 851 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Commissioner, Service Tax Commissionerate, Noida Versus M/s Hcl Technologies Ltd.

    Refund claim - Held that - the order passed by the Tribunal is wholly correct in so far as it has recorded reasons that the two orders were passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in cross appeals arising from a single order- in-original passed by the adjudicating authority and further that two orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) were apparently conflicting - appeal dismissed........ + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 850 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

    Special Public Prosecutor Rep. by Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise (Legal) Madurai -2 Versus M/s. Vasu Chemicals and others

    Enhancement of punishment imposed on the respondents / accused - main point raised by the learned Special Public Prosecutor for Central Excise appearing for the petitioner/complainant is that the Trial Court had committed an error by imposing a lesser sentence of imprisonment i.e., till the raising of the Court, without following the mandatory provisions of Section 9(1)(d)(i) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. - Held that - It is seen that the Tria....... + More


    Electronics Corporation of India Limited Versus Union of India represented by Secretary, Revenue And Another

    Maintainability of petition - alternative remedy - power of review - Whether the decisions of this Court in M/s. RESOLUTE ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. V/s. UNION OF INDIA 2015 (319) ELT 51 (AP) and STAR ENTERPRISES V/s. JOINT COMMISSIONER, GUNTUR , 2015 (4) TMI 40 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT require reconsideration? - Held that - the Constitutional power of judicial review vesting in this Court under Article 226 cannot be whittled down or be made subjec....... + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 695 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    M/s. Tex-Age Versus Union of India and Anr.

    Effect of the order of CESTAT - Held that - Once the effect of this order is that the tribunal s direction is upheld, then, all that remains is giving effect to the order of the CESTAT - writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to give effect to the order of the CESTAT as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition disposed off........ + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 694 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Vithal SSK Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III

    Whether the judgment and order of the Appellate Tribunal is perverse inasmuch as though a specific submission was made on the issue of Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and on the issue of increase of penalty by the Adjudicating Authority by issuing a Corrigendum before the Appellate Tribunal, the same has not been dealt with by the Appellate Tribunal? - Held that - In the Appeal before this Court, we do not have benefit of the reasons re....... + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 627 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s Advance Steel Tubes Ltd.

    Refund claim - unjust enrichment - Whether the doctrine of unjust enrichment in Section 11B of the Act is applicable to the facts of the case, having regard to the fact that the amount in dispute charged as excise duty in the debit side of profit and loss account constituted cost of manufacture and absorbed by sale vale depicted in credit side of that account? - matter was referred to Third Member. - Held that - The third Member has noted that a ....... + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 626 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    M/s Euro Metal And Glass Interiors Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India Ministry of Finance, The Commissioner of Central Excise

    Default in monthly payment of duty - Department denied CENVAT credit for the period November 2012 to December 2013 only for the reason that the assessee defaulted in payment of duty from October 2012 onwards and as the said default continued for more than 30 days, they are not eligible to utilize the disputed CENVAT credit as per the provisions of Rule 8(3A) of the Rules 2002. - Held that - it was admitted by the Department that the assessee is l....... + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 625 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Versus Union Of India, Central Board Of Excise And Customs (CBEC) , Joint Secretary To Government Of India, Commissioner Of Central Excise, Assistant Commissioner Of Central Excise

    Finalisation of Provisional assessment - appellant s contention is that the show cause notice was with respect to two separate block periods of 6 months each and the provisional assessment has to be carried out for that block period setting off the gains against the losses - Held that - since the returns have to be filed after the last date of a particular month and the duties with respect to that month have to be paid before the 5th or 7th of th....... + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 454 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    M/s. Soham Realtors Pole Star, Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Nagpur-II

    Condonation of delay - Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - whether service can be said to be valid or not and relevance of answer to this question, insofar as prayer for condonation of delay is concerned, arise for adjudication in this appeal? - Held that - merely because proper steps were taken to complete service in terms of Section 37C, that by itself will not be sufficient to reject the prayer for condonation of delay. It will have ....... + More


    Anil Kumar Aggarwal Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Inspector of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation, Visakhapatnam

    Evasion of tax - prosecution case is that A4 and A5 having obtained permission from the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Guntur for destruction of two autoconers, indeed, did not do so, but they, with the conspiracy of A1 to A3, fabricated record of destruction in their premises and sold the two autoconers to M/s.SJSML for ₹ 50 lakhs - Whether there are merits in this Criminal Petition to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.29 of 2006? - He....... + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 350 - KERALA HIGH COURT

    RP Techsoft International Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India And The Commissioner of Central GST And Central Excise, Thiruvananthapuram

    Validity of assessment order - main activity, according to the petitioner, is the supply and installation of goods purchased from the vendor by integrating such goods to the need of such customer - Held that - The power of the Commissioner would depend upon the factual situation. In that sense, without adverting to the factual situation, the Commissioner could not have exercised the power. That means the Commissioner had erred in exercising the j....... + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 184 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    The Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune III Versus M/s. Prakash Foods Ltd.,

    CENVAT credit - inputs/capital goods - denial on the ground that the same have been used in the manufacture of final products which were wholly exempted from duty in terms of N/N. 115/75 - Held that - the Commissioner has not recorded a finding of fact that the entire exercise was revenue neutral. No reasons have been assigned by the CESTAT for coming to the conclusion that entire exercise was revenue neutral - There is complete absence of findin....... + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 183 - GUJRAT HIGH COURT

    Chandra Dyeing And Printing Mills Private Limited And 1 Versus Union of India And 3

    Attachment of immovable property - recovery of dues of lessee - whether the department can seek recovery of the dues of Harshwardhan Exports through sale of the property of the petitioner? - proviso to subsection (1) of Section 11 of the Central Excise Act as well as on subclause (ii) of clause( c) of subsection (1) of section 142 of the Customs Act. - Held that - invocation of the said provisions by the department is defective. The central excis....... + More

  • 2018 (3) TMI 104 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    M/s. Schevaran Laboratories Pvt. Limited Versus The Union of India

    Recovery proceedings through garnishee proceedings - Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Held that - this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner- Company, ought to have kept the lis alive by filing the regular appeal before the Tribunal u/s.35 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the impugned order passed by the first appellate authority namely, learned Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mysore - Petition disposed off........ + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1675 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Oriental Aromatics Limited Versus Union of India and Anr.

    Restoration of appeal - Condonation of delay - Held that - Before you doubt the bonafides of a litigant and term the version as insufficient for condoning the delay, a Court of law like a Tribunal must find out from its own record atleast any contrary version of the Revenue. If there is no version of the Revenue contravening this factual position, or is any conduct attributable as negligent can be culled out during the course of the proceedings o....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1674 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    Mr. Jitendra Pandey, Kashyap Sweetners Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals) Vapi

    Condonation of delay in filing appeal - Whether Appellate Tribunal was justified in not condoning the delay in filing the Appeal before the Appellate Tribunal without appreciating that reason given by the Appellant was justified and there was no mala fide reasons or dilatory tactics involved in causing the delay? - Held that - the Tribunal could not have faulted the assesses. The assesses acted bonafide and under legal advise. There was nothing i....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1623 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

    M/s. Sas Automotive Pvt. Ltd. Versus Superintendent Of Goods & Services Tax And Others

    Direction to supply certified copy of the SCN dated 17.10.2012 - case of respondent is that the petitioner in ordinary course ought to have already been served with SCN and the order in original dated 17.10.2012 and 06.01.2017, receptively and as such there is no occasion for the petitioner to have applied again for seeking certified copies of the said documents. - Held that - Denial of certified copies of the documents cannot be justified specia....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1613 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

    The Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs And Service Tax, Belagavi Versus M/s. Nugget Tyres

    Maintainability of appeal - Monetary amount involved in the appeal - classification of taxable service - Section 35G of the CEA 1944 - Held that - the dispute as to the classification of services is not maintainable before this Court under Section 35G of the Act - Even otherwise, ordinarily, as per the Litigation Policy following the instructions in F.No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17.12.2015, the value of the service tax disputed being less than....... + More


    Customs Central Excise And Service Tax Versus M/s Mittal Applicances Ltd.

    CENVAT credit - denied mainly on the basis of certain irregularities alleged with reference to transportation and non-existence of evidence for transportation of duty paid inputs to the premises of the respondent - Held that - On due consideration of the material evidence which has come on record the Tribunal came to the conclusion that no case is made out to reverse the findings recorded by the Commissioner and upheld the order and dismissed the....... + 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