Feedback   New User   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 Tri Central Excise - Tri
Citation -
Order by


Central Excise - Tribunal - Case Laws

Showing 81 to 100 of 54894 Records

  • 2018 (2) TMI 812 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    Principal Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai Versus M/s. Kanishk Steel Industries Ltd.

    Clandestine removal - allegation is that unaccounted raw materials, i.e. MS ingots were received by the respondent from DSML - Held that - the main documentary evidence in this case is the loose sheets recovered from the respondent factory and hard disc recovered from the computer installed in the premises of DSML. According to department, the Director of respondent company Shri Ashok Bohra has identified the handwriting of the loose sheets is th....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 810 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

    Western India Ceramics Pvt. Limited, Chetan K. Patel Versus C.C.E. & S. Tax, Vadodara

    Clandestine manufacture and removal - Glazed vitrified Tiles - excesses and shortage of stock - case is mainly based on statements, which remins uncontroverted - Held that - All these statements remain uncontroverted and the Appellant at no point of time has requested for cross-examination of these evidences. Besides, from the statement of the Director, it is concluded by the authorities below that M/s Labh Traders was a fictitious firm and creat....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 809 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Orchid Health Care Versus CCE, Chennai And Vice-Versa

    Benefit of N/N. 52/2003 and N/N. 22/2003 - raw materials, capital goods imported and locally procured - whether the inputs and capital goods used in R&D is eligible for exemption from duty and whether the input services used in R&D is eligible for Cenvat credit? - Held that - after the R&D process the samples of the final products undergo test and then are manufactured and exported by the appellants. It is very much clear that the R&D activities ....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 808 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. TTK Prestige Ltd. Versus CCE, Chennai

    CENVAT credit - Department was of the view that the credit on various services is not eligible as the services were rendered at various other places for which the corporate office had made payments - Held that - When the corporate office of he appellant has taken input service distributor registration, the distribution of credit on ISD invoices is in accordance with law. Intention of having ISD registration is for distribution of credit when ther....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 807 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Rasi Technitex (P) Ltd. Versus CCE, Salem

    CENVAT credit - N/N. 29/2004-CE dated 09/07/2004 and N/N. 30/2004-CE dated 09/07/2004 - allegation raised in the SCN is that the appellants are not eligible for the credit available on the components, spares and accessories of capital goods, for the reason that the final products cleared by them are exempted from payment of duty - Held that - identical issue decided in the case of The Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s. Same Duetz Fahr Ind....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 806 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s Daga Trading Co. (P) Ltd., Shri Ramesh Kumar Daga Versus CCE, Delhi-I

    CENVAT credit - allegations against the appellants are that they have never purchased raw material from the various suppliers and issued bogus invoices to M/s Veekay Industries for availment of Cenvat credit - Held that - Since, the department has not adduced any plausible evidence to substantiate its stand that the appellant did not supply the goods and only issued invoices, facilitating the buyer to avail Cenvat credit, such stand of department....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 805 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    M/s. Ganage Pressings Private Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune

    CENVAT credit - rejection on the ground that the appellant had raised debit notes towards rejection of inputs upon the supplier of inputs - Held that - the Appellant has disputed the demand on various reasons which cannot be gone into detail at this stage as the same requires the verification of records of the Appellant - the Appellant should be extended an opportunity to produce the relevant records which they wish to rely in their support - app....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 804 - CESTAT, MUMBAI

    Polygenta Technologies Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Nasik-I

    CENVAT credit - supplementary invoices - Rule 9(i)(bb) of the CCR - ST paid on reverse charge basis - Held that - Rule 9(i)(bb) is applicable to supplementary invoice, bill or challan issued by provider of output service and Rule 9(i)(e) is applicable, inter alia, to a person liable to pay service tax under Rule 2(1)(d) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 - It is apparent that the appellant is not service provider and therefore Rule 9(i)(bb) would not be ....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 803 - CESTAT, MUMBAI

    JBM Auto Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I

    Refund of the amount of interest paid on transfer/sale of assets to their joint venture unit - time limitation - Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Held that - even if an amount is paid under mistake of law, the limitation under Section 11B is applicable - time limitation applicable to the facts of present case - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant........ + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 802 - CESTAT, MUMBAI

    Avon Organics Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III

    CENVAT credit - steel items used for fabrication of molasses tanks in appellant s factory - credit has been denied as the appellant had failed to produce certificate from the Range Superintendent of Medak unit to the effect that no credit has been availed at Medak unit. - Held that - Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules puts onus on the claimant to establish receipt and utilization of the material and to satisfy Central Excise officers regarding ....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 801 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai Versus Benzo Chem Industries P. Ltd.,

    Refund of unutilized CENVAT credit - deemed export - Rule 5 of CCR - Held that - the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of A.I Dupont India Pvt. Ltd. 2014 (5) TMI 128 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT is essentially on the issue of binding precedence, where it was held that on inputs used in manufacture of goods cleared by TDA units to 100 EOU refund of CENVAT credit would be available to the assessee and it would not be denied on the ground that it wa....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 800 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Ciron Drugs And Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai

    Demand of interest and penalty - demand has been made without raising any demand under Section 11A of CEA - Held that - no demand of interest and imposition of penalty can be made unless there is a determination of duty under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act - Since in the instant case, there is no demand of duty and determination u/s 11A of the CEA, the demand of interest and imposition of penalty cannot sustain - appeal allowed........ + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 799 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Sushila International Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-II

    Extended period of limitation - CENVAT credit - stocks at the time of surrender of their licence - Held that - the appellant calculated the amount wrongly and reversed the lower amount. This very act of the appellant is amounting to mis-declaration and suppression with intention to evade duty - extended period of limitation rightly invoked - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant........ + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 798 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Shree Tatyasaheb Kore Warana SSK Ltd., Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolapur

    Rectification of mistake - applicant pointed out that he could not appear when the matter was called in respect of the impugned order and therefore, could not inform the Court that in the appellant s own case, this Tribunal has vide order No.A/772/C-IV/WZB/2006/WMB dated 09/01/2006 allowed the benefit of similar items - Held that - for the purpose of limitation, the appellant could have held a bonafide belief in view of the Tribunal s order in th....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 797 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Sandoz Pvt. Ltd., Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune

    Rectification of mistake - the order dated 24/08/2017 records that no evidence has been given in support of the assertion that the appellant had not utilised the credit - Held that - the liability of interest cannot be set aside, even if the appellants have not utilised the credit. It is seen that the show-cause notice does not specifically say that the appellants have mis-declared the price or committed fraud, etc. - The appellant had taken 14 t....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 796 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s. Man Trucks India P. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And ST, Bhopal

    Valuation - fully manufactured motor vehicle cleared by the job worker - Revenue held a view that the job worker having cleared fully manufactured motor vehicle on behalf of the appellant to depot of the appellant for further sale, the correct valuation should be the transaction value of such motor vehicle and not the cost plus processing charge as adopted by the job worker. - Held that - Admittedly, the manufacture of full vehicle is not carried....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 795 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    CCE, Thane-I Cersus M/s Padmavati Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

    Clandestine removal - manufacturer of Goa Gutka or bonafide purchaser of the goods - Held that - it is established that the respondent have purchased the goods in the market bonafidely, therefore no duty can be demanded from the respondent who is not a manufacturer of Goa Gutka. Since he is the bonafide buyer of the goods, the goods is also not liable to confiscation. - Irrespective of the fact whether the subject goods were cleared on payment of....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 794 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    M/s PRS Permacel Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-II

    CENVAT credit - whether the appellant is entitled for CENVAT credit in respect of input services provided at job worker premises? - Held that - though the service was provided in the premises of job worker but the bill was raised in the name of appellant only expenses of such services was born by the appellant. Merely because the service was provided in the premises of job worker it cannot be said that the service was not received by the appellan....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 793 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    M/s Technocraft Industries (I) Ltd. Versus CCE, Thane I

    CENVAT credit - denial on the ground that the CENVAT documents have discrepancy and some information is not appearing on the bills/challan - Held that - only due to reason some information not appearing in the invoices/challan CENVAT credit cannot be denied - There is no hard and fast rule that unless all the information available on the document such as bill, challan etc. then only credit can be allowed. - Matter remanded to the Adjudicating Aut....... + More

  • 2018 (2) TMI 792 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    McCoy Architectural Systems Pvt. Ltd., Ajay Artreya Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai V

    Manufacture - Appellants carried out fabrication activity across all parts of the country and offered complete structure and execution and installation of the structure - whether the activity amounts to manufacture? - Held that - In the present case, the appellants have no workshop to carry out the fabrication like cutting, welding, grinding etc. The appellants gave the work to a sub-contractor who assembles structure at the customer site. The st....... + 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