Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property/ Transactions Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 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 >= 3 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 - Tribunal - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 61036 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.

• 2020 (9) TMI 987 - CESTAT MUMBAI
  
  CENVAT Credit - Reverse charge Mechanism - service provider or not - manufacturer of goods having ‘nil’ tariff rate of duty - HELD THAT:- The issues involved in the present appeal were considered by the Tribunal and the appeals filed by the appellant were allowed by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals). Pursuant to the remand direction of the Tribunal, the Commissioner (Appeals) took-up de novo proceedings and passed the order dated 17.10.2018 in favour of the appellant, by granting the refund benefit. Since, the appellant submits that the issue arising out of the present dispute is identical to the facts and the issues decided in the orders referred above, the present appeal should also be allowed by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision on merits - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 897 - CESTAT KOLKATA
  
  Clandestine Removal - illicit production of plywood on the basis of consumption of resin - demand based only on presumption only without any corroborative evidences - case of appellant is that while issuing the demand, the consumption of resin has been calculated on average basis and not on the basis of thickness viz. resin consumption which was declared at the time of search proceedings - HELD THAT:- It is observed that no investigation has been undertaken by the Revenue towards procurement of additional raw materials clandestinely. No other corroborative documents have been produced. Investigations against the consignees have also not been done before raising demand on the allegation of clandestine clearance. The onus is definitely on the department to establish manufacture and clearance of such goods and also regarding the receipt of p....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 788 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
  
  Rejection of Refund claim - time limitation - section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - HELD THAT:- The appellants had two units, one in DTA unit and other is 100% EOU, refund claim have been filed by both the units. DTA have cleared the goods against CT-3 to their 100% EOU and have claimed refund. The 100% EOU has claimed refund for goods exported. Earlier in the proceedings the matters was remanded by tribunal - The appellants are of the view that both Appeal are within the limitation of one year. It is seen that the Appeal No. E/13076/2018 pertains to period October’ 12 to Dec.’12 and the refund claim was filed on 04.10.2013 - In appeal no. E/13077/2018 pertains to the period April’13 to June’13 and refund claim was filed on 09.04.14. In these circumstances it is seen that in both these cases the refund has....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 787 - CESTAT MUMBAI
  
  Reversal of proportionate Cenvat credit - common input/input services used for manufacture of dutiable as well as exempt goods - Rule 6(3A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - HELD THAT:- The issue arising out of the present dispute regarding determination and payment of amount as per the formula prescribed under sub-rule (3A) of Rule 6 ibid is no more open for any debate in view of the Co-ordinate Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of the appellant itself COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ST, RAJKOT VERSUS M/S. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED [2019 (3) TMI 784 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD]. There are no merits in the impugned order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 786 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
  
  Reversal of Cenvat Credit - clearance of iron ore fines - separate excisable goods but exempted commodity or not - whether iron ore fines in question are needed to be considered as exempted goods, being sold for consideration during the relevant period as provided under the amended provisions of Rule 6 (1) of CCR, 2004? - HELD THAT:- It is foremost important to understand the procedure or the activity of the appellant. Not only from the show cause notice, but from the appellant’s submission, the admitted procedure adopted by the appellant in manufacturing the final product i.e. ‘sponge iron’ is that, the appellant procures iron ore etc., as the input for manufacturing sponge iron. The iron ore lumps of different sizes are first crushed and are then segregated by screening. It is thereafter that requisite sized iron ore /....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 695 - CESTAT KOLKATA
  
  Irregular availment of CENVAT Credit - contravention to Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - demand based on various statements - reliability on Chartered Engineer’s Certificate - discrepancies pointed out by the department with regard to the “Transportation of Goods” from the factory of M/s.Industrial Associates to the factory of the appellant - Failure to Produce Documents - non-appearance against summons - HELD THAT:- The inputs received by the appellants were duly entered in their RG-23A Part-I for the period from August, 2008 to January, 2009 and such records were subject to scrutiny by their jurisdictional Central Excise Officers and the credits were being availed with the knowledge of the Revenue and by reflecting the inputs in the records. In such a ....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 645 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
  
  Clandestine Removal - shortage of finished goods - Kraft Paper - main evidence for making allegation of clandestine removal and raising demand is computer printouts - Corroborative evidences or not - reliability of statements - period from April, 2009 to July, 2012 - HELD THAT:- As per section 36B of Central Excise Act, 1944, printed material produced by the computer shall be admissible as evidence only when the condition mentioned in Sub-section (2) and other provision contained in the said section 36B are satisfied. As per the condition laid down in subsection (2) the statement of computer printout must be produced by the computer during the period for which the computer was used regularly to store or process information for the purposes of any activities regularly carried on over that period by the person having lawful control over the....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 644 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
  
  CENVAT Credit - inputs not received - forged and fake invoices - chain of company/firm(s) created by Shri Gaurav Mungad - such cenvat credit was utilised towards payment of duty on the goods exported, and thereafter obtained undue rebate claim - proper opportunity of hearing not given - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- The case of Revenue is mainly based on the statements of the aforementioned persons. In spite of the categorical request for cross examination of the aforementioned persons, in the adjudication proceedings and also of some other persons connected with the investigations, who had verified the cenvat credit records and the documents of the appellants as well as the officers involved in scrutiny and sanctioning of the rebate claims. But this request of the appellants have been arbitrarily refused by the ld. Commissi....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 643 - CESTAT KOLKATA
  
  Recovery of Short paid duty - fabrication of steel tanks for Oil Companies - allegation that the appellants did not obtain Central Excise Registration even after exceeding the SSI exemption limit of turnover ₹ 1.00 Crore - Extended period of limitation - whether the tanks fabricated by the assessee are goods and whether they are liable to Central Excise duty? - Difference of Opinion - Majority decision. HELD THAT:- The appellant manufacture tank in their factory, although some parts of the tanks are finally attached at the buyers’ premises only. I agree with the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the impugned goods when left the factory is incomplete and unfinished tanks. But they are still classified as tanks and is liable to excise duty under CETH 73090090 of CETA. The learned Member(Technical) has cons....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 642 - CESTAT MUMBAI
  
  Hearing of appeal - supply of necessary documents - HELD THAT:- The appeal is taken up for hearing after handing over the necessary statements relied upon by the adjudicating authority in passing the impugned order to the Appellant. Valuation - short payment of duty - allegation that even though their Miraz unit sold Motor Spirit blended with Ethanol and collected duty on the whole quantity of Motor spirit including duty on Ethanol, but failed to discharge the excess duty collected on ethanol under Section 11D of Central Excise Act, 1944 - whether the appellants are required to deposit the amount of ₹ 75,94,886/- on the quantity of ethanol of 712.290 KL blended with 13533.580 KL of Motor Spirit(Petrol),when the resultant quantity of 14245.850 KL of EBP was sold as Motor Spirit ,under Section 11D, and interest under Section 11DD of C....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 503 - CESTAT MUMBAI
  
  CENVAT Credit - inability to maintain separate accounts for consumption of common inputs and inputs services - scope of rule 6(3) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - two options under the Rules, mutually exclusive or not? - HELD THAT:- It is clear from a reading of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 that rule 6(1) and rule 6(2) complement each other and are in contradistinction with rule 6(3) which, qualified by the non obstante clause, operates on its own. The latter is unambiguously clear in conferring the privilege of exercising of option to the assessee. It was, therefore, not appropriate for the adjudicating authority to resort to computation that yielded higher revenue. It would be appropriate for the adjudicating authority to consider the matters afresh after giving an opportunity to the appellant to furnish the computation preferred by them but ....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 502 - CESTAT HYDERABAD
  
  Classification of goods - RBD Palm Stearin which they manufacture from refined palm oil - classified under Central Excise Tariff heading 1511 9090 or not? - benefit of N/N. 03/2006- CE dt.01.03.2006 (S.No.9) (as amended) - CBEC Circular No.81/2002-CUS dt.03.12.2002 - period September, 2008 to September, 2010 - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- The issue has been settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in October, 2010 in the case of CCE, C AND SERVICE TAX VERSUS JOCIL LTD. [2010 (12) TMI 24 - SUPREME COURT] and it has been held that Palm Stearin is classifiable under Central Excise Tariff Heading 3823 and not under CTH 1511. Thus, it has been decided against assessee and in favour of the revenue - Respectfully following the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of JOCIL Ltd, it is held that the appellant’s p....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 431 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
  
  CENVAT Credit - inputs - M.S. Plates used in fabrication of final products as well as for platforms used as accessory to capital goods - applicability of restriction introduced in Explanation to Rule 2(k) for the relevant period of June, 2007 - HELD THAT:- The appellants have used the MS Plates both as inputs for fabrication of machinery, which is their final product liable to duty and have also used the MS Plates as Steel Platform for fabrication of their finished product being machinery. Thus, the MS Plates used in steel platform are also admittedly used in the factory of production. Rule 2(k) of CCR defines, “inputs as all goods used in the factory by the manufacturer of the final product”. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to cenvat credit on MS Plates - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 383 - CESTAT MUMBAI
  
  Valuation - undervaluation - “Polo” and “Vento” models of their car - related party transaction - interconnected undertakings - Mutuality of Interest - Section 4(3)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - four SCN for same transactions and same period - Impact of the CAG report of 2014 on determination of value - benefit of cum-duty price - extended period of limitation - change of opinion - demand of interest - various penalties. Whether the Commissioner could have considered and adjudicated four different Show Cause Notices in respect of the same transactions for the same period proposing to demand duty by invoking different routes to the valuation of Goods Cleared? - HELD THAT:- We cannot agree with the method adopted by the Commissioner while dealing with the three Show Cause Notice dated 06.02.2015. Commissioner ....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 302 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
  
  CENVAT Credit - fake purchases - It was alleged that M/s.Abhay Chemicals, Jammu had not purchased raw materials from their stated suppliers and therefore they could not have manufactured any finished goods in the absence of procurement of raw materials, with the sole intent to facilitate undue cenvat credit to their buyers - HELD THAT:- The allegations in the show cause notice of taking irregular cenvat credit is based on a communication dated 30.02.2012 received from the Additional Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise, J & K, Jammu, stating that the several units in their jurisdiction located in Jammu & Kashmir appear to be not actually engaged in the manufacturing activities - Further, it is found that the appellants have led evidence that they have received the inputs along with duty paying documents. Further, the appella....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 301 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
  
  Transfer of CENVAT Credit - closure of Delhi unit & merger with its Baddi unit - Rule 10 of CCR - HELD THAT:- Admittedly appellant have maintained proper record of their transactions including taking of cenvat credit on the eligible inputs. Appellant have claimed transfer/ shifting of their Delhi unit to their Baddi unit. But from the finding of the Court below, it is found that no finding have been recorded with respect to the claim of shifting of Delhi unit to Baddi unit and its consequent merger with the Baddi unit. Shifting of a factory to another site is the primary condition under Rule 10(1) alongwith liabilities of the Delhi unit, if any, and Rule 10(3) provides for additional condition that such transfer/ unit or factory should include transfer of stock of input as such or in process, or the capital goods to the new site and s....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 300 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
  
  CENVAT Credit - Iron Steel, G.I. Flat, MS Beam, MS channel, Flats, Joist, old and used plates, New MS Plates, PPGI profiles sheets etc. used in erection of EOT crane (during the gestation period) for the new factory - steel structures, nut and bolt, electrical items, 122 KV, Gantry column, 132 KV Isolator, earthing wire, etc. utilised in fabrication of the power house station - rejection of cenvat credit on the ground that these items are falling under chapter heading 72 and 73, and thus not specified under Rule 2A(a) of Cenvat Credit rules. HELD THAT:- It is admitted fact that the items have been utilised in the factory of production for erection of new machinery, of EOT crane, utilised in fabrication of the power house station, which are capital goods and are essential for setting up of the factory which manufactures dutiable goods - Al....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 222 - CESTAT MUMBAI
  
  Benefit of exemption under N/N. 28/2002-CE - Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) (Gasohol) - Allegation that the appellant had not complied with the condition of said notifications inasmuch as the EBP did not satisfy the Bureau of Indian Standard’s (BIS) specification 2796:2000 - requirement of deposit of duty under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Revenue’s main contention is that to be eligible for exemption under aforesaid Notifications, inter alia, it is required to show that EBP conforms the BIS 2796:2000 standards. It is their allegation that the Appellant failed to establish that the EBP cleared by them from their Vashi Terminal conforms the BIS specification - appellants, on the other hand, claimed that the tests carried out on the samples of EBP at their Vashi Terminal even though limited to nine out of fifteen t....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 78 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
  
  Valuation - ball or roller bearing - related party transaction - rejection of declared value - value is sought to be determined on the basis of price at which M/s. SKF India Ltd. has sold the product - benefit of N/N. 6/2006-CE. - HELD THAT:- So far as loan granted by M/S SKFIL to M/s SKFTIL is concerned interest at the rate of 9% has been fixed. It has also been specified that the rate of interest would be revised regularly at half yearly basis and shall not be less than the prevailing bank rate under section 49 of RBI Act, 1934. In view of above, it is apparent that this a purely business transaction and not a transaction creating interest in the business of each other. It is seen that M/s SKFIL and M/s SKFTIL are sharing some staff cost. It is seen that M/s SKFIL has factories located in Bangalore, Haridwar, Pune, Manesar and Jamshedpu....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 5 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH
  
  Method of Valuation - section 4A or Section 4 of CEA - manufacturer of pesticides and insecticides of less than 10 gms/10 ml - said packages were packed in bigger boxes of 15-20 packs and on the packages the appellant is putting MRP printed and paying duty - Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- Issue decided in appellant own case [2018 (5) TMI 1342 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH ] where it was held that the appellant have made packages for retail sale, they are legally bound to affix MRP of the said goods. In the circumstances, the appellant is required to discharge duty in terms of Section 4A of the Act. Therefore, the appellant has correctly discharged the duty liability under section 4A of the Act. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

---