|
Advanced Search Options
Central Excise - Tribunal - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 61645 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.
- 2021 (10) TMI 639 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
Maintainability of appeal - being two units of the appellants involved in this case, whether only one appeal is sufficient or one more appeal is required to be filed? - interpretation of various notifications and availability of exemption - HELD THAT:- This issue was not disputed by the revenue in earlier two round of appeals, which attained finality, therefore at this stage the objection of the revenue is not tenable. Moreover, even though there are two units i.e. Twisting unit and other is Dyeing unit but both the units belongs to one company, hence only one consolidated appeal is sufficient, particularly when Order-In-Original is one common order in respect of both the units. Hence, the revenue’s objection on this point is not sustained. Exemption under N/N. 5/1998-CE, N/N. 5/1999-CE, N/N. 6/2000-CE, N/N. 3/2001-CE, N/N. 6/2002-C....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 638 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
Valuation - Nature of amount received - Recovery of Central excise duty with interest and penalty - amount received by the appellant from M/s. Honda Siel Car India Ltd. [Honda India], for the loss suffered by the appellant on account of the cancellation of the contract for supply of auto parts used in the manufacture of vehicles - HELD THAT:- Section 4(1) of the Excise Act deals with valuation of excisable goods for purposes of charging of duty of excise. It provides that where the duty of excise is chargeable on any excisable goods with reference to their value, then, on each removal of the goods, such value shall be, if the assessee and the buyer of goods are not related and the price is the sole consideration for the sale, be the transaction value. Transaction value has been defined under section 4(1)(d) of the Excise Act to mean the p....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 585 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
Clandestine Removal - threshold limit of SSI Exemption - third party evidences reliable or not - cross-examination of witnesses - entire case was made out mainly on the basis of diaries which is marked as A/2 &A/3, said to have been recovered from the appellant’s factory - Department’s case is that the appellant have clandestinely removed the goods consequently the value of SSI exemption limit has exceeded and appellant is not entitle for the SSI exemption - penalty - HELD THAT:- The entries in the diaries include the entries of removal in respect of which the invoices were issued. The investigation agency have also recovered certain documents from the transporters, various statements were recorded mainly of Mr. Ashuram, Director of the appellant company and also of transporters and dealers, documents from weighbridge also....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 584 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
CENVAT Credit - import of copper scrap, brass scrap, zinc scrap, aluminum scrap as shown received in their factories - goods was diverted in the market but availed the Cenvat Credit thereon on the strength of bills of entry - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- It is not only the correspondence between the appellant and DGCEI and the adjudicating authority but there are also number of letters written by the office of the adjudication authority to the DGCEI for supplying the required documents. This itself shows that the appellant have not been given all the relied upon documents at any point of time. Since, there is no dispute that the appellant were not supplied the relied upon document as mentioned by them, the adjudication should not have taken place in absence of providing the said documents to the appellant. In this fact whic....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 530 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
CENVAT Credit - time limitation - denial of credit on the ground that appellant has not availed the Cenvat credit immediately on receipt of inputs therefore, it becomes time bar - period of 2009-2010 and 2010-11 in July 2013 - HELD THAT:- This issue has been considered by the Honb’le Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of INDUSTRIAL CABLES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDIGARH [2009 (1) TMI 281 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH] wherein the same issue of limitation for availing the Cenvat credit was considered and it was held that The interpretation of Rule 57G adopted by the Tribunal is incorrect and unjust and, therefore, the period of limitation of six months imported by the Tribunal in Rule 57G is unsustainable as the Tribunal or the Courts are not competent to import any specific period of lim....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 529 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
Seeking refund to Large Taxpayer Unit (Mumbai) of Cenvat Credit reversed/paid for LPG - LPG removed without payment of duty under Domestic LPG Subsidy Scheme - LPG, Exempt goods or not - requirement to maintain separate account in terms of Rule 6 (2) - Rules 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - HELD THAT:- As per the above Rule 6 (1) Cenvat Credit shall not be allowed on such quantity of input or input services used in or in relation to manufacture of exempted goods however, the exception is provided in the circumstances mention in sub rule 6 (2). In the present case the respondents have used input and input services in the manufacture of dutiable goods i.e. motor sprit (MS), High Speed Diesel Oil, aviation Turbine fuel (ATF), Naphtha, Fuel oil etc. the LPG is generated as one of the product which also dutiable but under the said scheme of....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 528 - CESTAT HYDERABAD
Classification of goods - Nimbooz - to be classified under CETH 2202 10 20 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 or under CETH 2202 90 20 under the category of ‘fruit pulp or fruit juice based drinks’? - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- A Larger Bench of the Tribunal in M/S BRINDAVAN BEVERAGES PRIVATE LIMITED, KRANTI KUMAR CHANDRAKAR, M/S PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, HAPUR AND BAREILLY [2019 (10) TMI 762 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD (LB)] has held that ‘Nimbooz’ would be classifiable under CETH 2202 10 20 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- The issue as to whether the Department was justified in invoking the extended period of limitation does not arise. The o....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 483 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
CENVAT Credit - input services - place of removal - GTA Services - transportation charges for transfer of finished goods/ semi finished goods from appellant unit to the other unit of the same appellant company - installation of ‘special doors’ for manufacture of drugs under ‘good manufacturing practices’ - revenue neutrality - HELD THAT:- The appellant is entitled to cenvat credit on the doors and windows, which are admittedly essential for manufacture of finished goods of the appellant, by way of goods manufacturing practices. Any input purchased by the manufacturer which are used in the factory for the manufacture of final products, are allowable as inputs, whether it forms part of the finished goods or not. Admittedly, the doors and windows have been used in the factory of the appellant for manufacture of good q....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 482 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
CENVAT Credit - provision made in the books of accounts on account of Non-Moving Inventory, without reducing (writing down) the value of inventory - Rule 3(5B) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - HELD THAT:- Rule 3(5B) of the CCR is attracted only when the value of the asset and/or inventory is ‘write-off’ fully or partially, or wherein any specific provision to ‘write-off’ fully or partially has been made in the books of accounts. Admittedly, in the facts of the present case, the appellant has made only a ‘general provision’, which is not attributable to any particular capital asset/input. Admittedly, Revenue has not been able to identify the details of inventory or any asset, for which the general provision has been made. Thus, the show cause notice is erroneous as the demand has been made even on the reversal of the provision. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
- 2021 (10) TMI 434 - CESTAT KOLKATA
Extended period of limitation - Method of Valuation - section 4 or section 4A of Central Excise Act or not - valuation of goods on the basis of MRP less prescribed abatement or not? - demand of differential duty amount by valuing the goods under Section 4 of the Act on the ground that the goods in bulk packs of 210 Ltr and 180 Ltr. were meant for industrial sale and not retail sale - HELD THAT:- When there are clear directions from the excise authorities from Chennai and Mumbai Commissionerate to value the goods under Section 4A in respect of factories located in respective jurisdictions, there cannot be any reason to hold in the instant case that the appellant’s Kolkata factory, which is owned by the same legal entity, has deliberately resorted to value the goods under Section 4A as against Section 4 of the Act. Further, no evidenc....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 433 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
CENVAT Credit - packing material - common input used in exempted goods as well as taxable goods - non-maintenance of separate records - non-submission of proper CA certificate - Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - maintainability of appeal u/s 35 of Central Excise Act, 1944 - HELD THAT:- The Commissioner was absolutely wrong while rejecting the application of the appellant on the ground that the SCN has been issued as per clause 73 of the Finance Act, 2010. It is independent matter to rule 6 to be settled even if either the SCN was issued or any order was passed or any appeal is pending before any forum therefore, only because the SCN was issued commissioner should not have rejected the application of the appellant. Non-submission of proper CA certificate - HELD THAT:- The same could have been advised to the appellant for submitting the....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 383 - CESTAT KOLKATA
CENVAT Credit - input services - services availed for setting up of Coal Handling Plant - Coal Handing Plant (CHP) has been set up by the appellant for evacuation of coal from its mining premises - period from June 2013 to November 2015 - HELD THAT:- The purpose of setting up of the CHP is to load the coal into the railway wagons in an automated manner after the coal is crushed into the desired size. It is not in dispute that the services used by the appellant is for modernisation of the coal loading process. The definition of input service specifically include services received by a manufacturer for modernisation of a factory. On perusal of decision of the Tribunal in the case of Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd [2021 (7) TMI 1094 - CESTAT HYDERABAD] relied upon by the appellant, the Tribunal has observed that without setting up of the fac....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 382 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
Adjustment made from the sanctioned amount of rebate claim - rebate of duty paid on the goods, which were exported by the appellants - Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - HELD THAT:- On perusal of provisions of Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, it is evident that the adjustment in the present case has been made bona fide, as permissible under the provisions of the Act. Appeal dismissed.
- 2021 (10) TMI 381 - CESTAT CHENNAI
Valuation - inclusion of amortised cost of patterns in respect of clearances to M/s.BEML - contravention of Rules 4, 6 and 8 of Central Excise (No.2) Rules, 2001 - whether the cost of patterns supplied by M/s.BEML are required to be amortised on all the castings cleared by the appellant even though the cost was amortised on the number of castings initially ordered by the customer? HELD THAT:- The appellants manufacture 10 castings. They clear these 10 castings by amortising the value of the pattern of ₹ 100 equally on these 10 castings say ₹ 10 rupees on each casting. The value of the pattern i.e. ₹ 100 stands covered by 10 castings. However, because of the subsequent orders of the customer, the appellant manufactures 5 more castings. As the value of the pattern has already been amortised on 10 castings, nothing remains ....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 380 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
CENVAT Credit - input services - C & F Services received by the appellant for the sale of their goods - place of removal - HELD THAT:- Where the sale of goods is taken place through C & F Agent, the premises of the same C & F Agent is the place of removal in terms of definition of ‘place of removal’ provided in Section(4)(3)(c)(iii) of Central Excise Act, 1944. As per the definition of Place of Removal, the C & F Agents premises clearly falls under sub-clause (iii) of clause © of Section 4(3) of Central Excise Act, 1944 is a place of removal. As per Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 services for clearance of goods up to the place of removal is an admissible input service - Since in the present case goods are cleared from the factory of the appellant and sold through C & F Agent, all the services e....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 307 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
CENVAT Credit - exempted product/by-product - Silica Sand and Ball Clay - common input service is used for mining of Lignite as well as Silica Sand and Ball Clay (taxable as well as exempt goods) - applicability of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - HELD THAT:- The main contract is for mining of Lignite while doing the excavation to achieve Lignite, the over burden has to be removed and this over burden constitute Silica Sand and Ball Clay etc., thereafter the Lignite is excavated. With this it is clear that to excavate the Lignite unavoidably upper layer has to be removed and, in that process the said by-products are also removed. Therefore, from the nature of mining of Lignite as discussed above, it is clear that the Silica Sand and Ball Clay are generated unavoidably which is inevitable. Any input/input services contained in any by-....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 300 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
Clandestine removal - shortage of raw material and excess of finished goods - entire case was made out on the basis of Income Tax investigation - no corroborative evidence produced - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute that show cause notices were issued and demand was confirmed only on the basis of investigation carried out by Income Tax department. On physical stock taking by the Central Excise department, no difference was found. Since the entire case was made out on the basis of Income Tax investigation and no independent evidence was brought on record by Central Excise department, the demand cannot be sustained. In a common investigation by the department, another case was made out against one of the units of the appellant, wherein this Tribunal considered the same set of facts and legal position relying on the judgments in the case of R....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 296 - CESTAT MUMBAI
CENVAT Credit - input services - employee compensation insurance service - period from May 2015 to April 2016 - denial of credit on the ground that the said service cannot be considered as an input service w.e.f. 01.04.2011 - HELD THAT:- The phrase ‘input service’ defined under Rule 2 (l) ibid has specifically excludes the life/health insurance taken by the employer for the personal use or consumption of any employee. In this case, it is not the case of Revenue that the insurance service was meant primarily for personal use by the employees. Rather, the insurance policy in this case was taken by the appellant in respect of its employees as per the statutory mandates provided under the Employee’s State Insurance Act, 1948 and the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923. Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of DHARTI D....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 231 - CESTAT BANGALORE
Classification of goods - Autoclave - Glass bead Sterilizer - Steam Clave - Hot Air Sterilizer - Autoclaves classifiable under Central Excise Tariff Heading 841910 (up to February 2005) and 84192010 (from March 2005) as held in the impugned order or under 901800 (up to February, 2005) and 90184900 (from March, 2005) or not - Glass Bead Sterilizer, Steam Clave and Hot Air Sterilizer classifiable under 841910 (up to February, 2005) and 84192010 (from March, 2005); or under 9018 - extended period of limitation - penalty - HELD THAT:- Rule 2 deals with incomplete and unfinished articles and articles mixed with other articles and is not relevant to this case. Rule 3(a) states that a specific description prevails over the general description. According to the appellant, this Rule is in its favour because ‘Dental equipment’ is a more....... + More
- 2021 (10) TMI 185 - CESTAT BANGALORE
CENVAT Credit - inputs/input services which is used in the manufacture of exempted goods of provision of exempted services - clearance of goods to SEZ developers by claiming exemption from payment of Central Excise duty - availing Cenvat credit on the inputs used in the manufacture of such goods - exemption to supplies made to SEZ developers - effect of notification dated 31.12.2008 - demand of interest and penalty - HELD THAT:- In this case, the appellant has not supplied the goods to SEZ units but has supplied them to SEZ developers. The case of the Revenue is, therefore, that the appellant is not entitled to the exemption from provisions of Rule 6(1), (2), (3) and(4) available under Rule 6(6)(i) of CCR. Since the appellant had not maintained separate accounts of inputs and input services, it is required to pay an amount equal to 10% of....... + More
........
|
