Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise 2012 2012 2012 (8) Central Excise - 2012 (8) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property 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 Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 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 - Case Laws

Showing 101 to 120 of 189 Records

• 2012 (8) TMI 628 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
  

  Rejecting the claim of classification - manufacture of lubricating oil - Held that:- As adjudicating authority had decided the issue only on the ground that the proper procedure was not followed at the time of drawal of samples of the goods for testing and has ignored the certificate produced from the National Test House, an Affidavit filed by Mr. Sharma - case is remanded to the lower adjudicating authority to decide the issue afresh

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 627 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Non eligibility for claim of Cenvat credit - the service of GTA availed for transportation of clinker from Sonadih plant to Nipania railway siding for onward transportation by rail to Jojobera plant of the appellant company - Held that:- The definition of 'place of removal' in Section 4 (3) (c) can be adopted for Cenvat Credit Rules only in those cases where the rate of duty is ad-vaiorem and the duty is charged on value determined under Section 4 - In this case, the duty on the goods - clinker is at specific rate and hence the definition of "place of removal" in Section 4 (3) (c) would be of no relevance.

  As the places on removal from where the duty is liable to be paid which in this case, is the factory gate of Sonadih factory, as the duty on clinker becomes payable at the time of removal from Sonadih factory therefore, the GTA service for transportation of clinker from Sonadih factory to Nipania depot, having been availed after the removal of the clinker from the factors, is 'prime facie' not covered by the definition of 'input service' - against assessee.

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 626 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
  

  Extended period of limitation – SSI exemption – assessee using brand name of other – Held that:- Assessees, M/s. Micro Chem Products ‘MCPPL’ - Another family concern, namely, M/s. Micro Plates Pvt. Ltd. ‘MPPL’ - MCPPL have removed finished goods without payment of duty while using the brand name “Micro” of MPPL on containers - contention of the assessees that ‘Micro’ is not a brand name belonging to MPPL but stands for the first name of MCPPL, cannot be accepted - MCPPL is not entitied to the benefit of SSI exemption on the ground of use of brand name of another person - assessees are liable to pay the duty as demanded in the show-cause notice together with appropriate interest and also pay amount of penalty equal to duty, as the demand has been upheld by invoking the extended period of limitation – in favor of revenue

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 625 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Demand of excise duty – Held that:- Activity of cutting and polishing of granites amount to manufacture only from 1-3-2006 in view of the budgetary changes in 2006 - alleged clandestine removal of granite slabs for the period from 1996-2000 does not amount to manufacture and hence no excise duty is payable

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 624 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Clandestine removal – Held that:- Conclusion reached by the Commissioner that the appellant has indulged in suppression of production and clandestine removal appears legal and proper - When the appellant has chosen to deal in clandestine activity, the department is left with no alternative but to rely on the private records for working out the suppressed production and clandestine removal

  Regarding extended period of limitation – Held that:- If the finding of fact regarding clandestine removal of goods is not disturbed, the show cause notice cannot be held to be beyond limitation in terms of proviso to Section 11A of the Act

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 602 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD
  

  Non eligibility of cenvat credit - rent a cab services - Held that:- As decided in Stanzen Toyotetsu India (P) Ltd. [2011 (4) TMI 201 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] Rent-a-Cab service is provided by the assessee to these workers to reach the factory premises in time which has a direct bearing on the manufacturing activity & by no stretch of imagination can it be construed as a welfare measure. It is a basic necessity so as to ensure that the work force comes on time at the work place, the employers have taken this measure which has a direct bearing on the manufacturing activity.

  As undisputed fact of the case that the services of rent a cab services were received by the respondent for transportation of their employees from their residence to the factory premises and back to the residence and the service provider is registered and respondent is discharging the service tax liability billed on on such services rendered - no ground to deny the claim - in favour of assessee.

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 601 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
  

  Clandestine clearance of goods - non inclusion of the value of engine/motor in the value of Concrete Mixer Machine - Held that:- As the appellant neither rebutted the allegation nor contended anything in support of their defence the lower authority has rightly held that 112 nos. of CMMs have been clandestinely removed without payment of duty and appropriate duty - remand the matter to the lower adjudicating authority with a direction to redetermine the duty liability on the 112 CMMs.

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 600 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - software licence key - contention of the applicant is that prior to 1.3.2006 the software was exempted from payment of central excise duty. It is only with effect from 1.3.2006 the software is liable to central excise duty – Held that:- Board vide circular dated 18.3.2011 in respect of the Customs Tariff has clarified that such keys which only permit the right to use the software are classifiable under Chapter Heading 49 of the Customs Tariff - matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 599 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Manufacture of sugar - by-product bio-compost came into existence which is being cleared by the respondents without payment of duty – Held that:- Demand of amount of 8% in respect of Bio-compost is set aside - pre-deposit of whole of the amount of penalty is waived.

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 598 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - Cenvat Credit - applicant is using MS plates, angles and channels to manufacture power cable distribution boards which are used in Poly Machines which are used in the manufacture of paper/paper boards – Held that:- Cable distribution boards are accessories for poly machines and that the MS channels and angles used are accessories to the said cable boards - eligible for CENVAT credit

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 596 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Input services - Cenvat Credit Scheme was amended by new Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, effective from 10-9-2004 by which they were allowed to take Cenvat credit of Service tax paid on input services – Held that:-Asse ssee had taken insurance of their plant and machinery and paid service tax on such insurance against bills dated prior to 10-9-2004 - credit is taken contrary to provisions in Rule 9(1)(f) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - assessee has taken proportionate credit by adopting their own interpretation without intimation to department would justify to consider this as a case of mis-representation and suppression to invoke extended period for demanding the excess credit availed and utilized

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 572 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
  

  Failure to furnish the re-warehousing certificate within stipulated period of 90 days in terms of Rule 173 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 - 100% EOU - goods cleared without payment of duty - demand of duty and penalty imposed - assessee contended furnishing copy of letter issued by the consignor M/s.FACOR in lieu of certificate - Held that:- Commissioner(Appeals) has rightly observed that AR-3A duly countersigned by the officer in charge of the warehouse at destination only being the authentic document as prescribed in the statute, the certificate of the consignee produced by the appellant will be of no avail. Also, appellant could not produce anything contrary or new to the above. balance of duty confirmed, however, taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, penalty imposed under Rule 173Q is set aside.

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 571 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
  

  SSI Exemption - Contravention of provisions of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Notification No.08/03-CE dated 01.03.2003 - Held that:- The appellant did not opt for availing the benefit of Notification No. 8/2003-CE dated 01.3.2003 at the beginning of the financial year thus option for the availment is not in accordance with the Central Excise Rules - The duty and the Education Cess which they did not pay for not determining the value of Rs. 25,44,255/- in computation with the aggregate value for home consumption, is computable with the aggregate clearance value in terms of the Notification No.08/2003-CE dated 01.3.2003.

  Penalty under Rule 27 is not sustainable as it was not invoked in the impugned SCN.

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 570 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
  

  Disallownace of CENVAT credit - job-work charges for grooving - Held that:- As it is not disputed that the service provider has paid the service tax and once the service tax has been paid and service has been used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products of the appellant, the appellant is rightly entitled to avail CENVAT credit - in favour of assessee.

  Manpower supply services - Held that:- As affidavit along with a copy of the muster roll in support of assessee's claim that they have used the labour in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products were not shown or produced before the lower authorities and, therefore, it will be appropriate to remand this matter back to the original adjudicating authority to consider the claim - in favour of assessee by way of remand.

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 569 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
  

  Alleged suppression of sales and wrong availment of benefit of Notification 64/95 dated 16.3.1995 - invokation of extended period of limitation - assessee engaged in the manufacture of IC engines, cleared goods manufactured to M/s. Goa Shipyard Ltd. by availing the benefit of Notification 64/95 - Held that:- It is found that respondents filed classification declaration before clearance of the goods. Also, necessary monthly returns alongwith invoices showing clearance of goods to M/s. Goa Shipyards Ltd. by claiming the benefit of Notification. In addition to this, also produced certificate from the competent authority that the goods in question are for use on board of naval ship. In these circumstances, the allegation of suppression with intent to evade duty is not sustainable. Demand beyond the normal period is held to be time barred - Decided against Revenue.

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 566 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
  

  CENVAT credit – Held that:- Appellant has not registered with the department as input service tax credit distributor, he cannot distribute service tax credit in respect of services availed elsewhere than in the unit where manufacturing activity is taking place and duty liability is discharged - appellant directed to make a pre-deposit

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 537 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD
  

  Ineligible claim of cenvat credit - appellant has not recorded the receipt of the inputs in RG 23A Part-1 register - Held that:- The material period involved in this case is August 2003 & from the year 2000, the necessity or the statutory requirement of maintaining RG 23A Part-1 & Part 2 registers have been done away with and it is for the assessee to justify his claim for the cenvat credit with the help of the private records maintained by him.

  The appellant had produced records of inward register maintained at security specifically recorded the receipt of copper tube from supplier at various dates and on perusal of the entries in the stock register there is no overwriting of any sort in respect of most of the entries made in said inward register as disputed by AO - the appellants have produced certificates issued by the said supplier indicating that the inputs were delivered to the appellant factory in the suppliers own truck/tempo, hence they have not issued any LR, as against these evidences the Revenue has not putforth any contrary evidence in the form of any inculpatory statement of the appellant's functionaries, the driver of tempo or of the supplier of inputs - in favour of assessee.

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 536 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - 100% E.O.U. - clearance of goods to DTA in pursuance of permission granted by the Development Commissioner - whether they are required to pay component of SAD or not – Held that:- Applicant claimed the benefit of Notification No. 23/2003-C.E. - SAD is levied under Section 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act on the imported goods to counter-balance of the sales tax, value added tax, local tax, etc - demand of duty including SAD component in the “aggregate of duty” is not sustainable

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 533 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
  

  Denial of benefit of Notification No.74/93-CE dated 28.02.93 - Held that:- The benefit of Notification 74/93-CE is not available to the goods manufactured by the State Electricity Board as the benefit of Notification is available to the goods manufactured in the factory belonging to the State Government intended for use for the Govt. Department - the matter required reconsideration by the adjudicating authority afresh in view of decision of ASSTT. ENGINEER (CIVIL) Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIPUR [2008 (9) TMI 105 - CESTAT NEW DELHI]the State Electricity Board is not a Govt.Department.

  ---

• 2012 (8) TMI 529 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Denial of cenvat credit - appellant in respect of their wind mills in Dewas availed the services of erection, installation and commissioning, repair and maintenance and also insurance and took Cenvat credit of the Service tax paid on these services - department was of the view since the wind mills are located far away from the factory and the power generated by the wind mill is not directly received in the factories of the appellants, the appellants would not be eligible for Cenvat credit – Held that:- there is nexus as the electricity generated by the wind mills has been used for running of the factories of the appellant and just because the electricity has not been directly supplied, but has been supplied through M.P. Electricity grid, it cannot be said that the wind mills are not captive power plant - services, in question, received by the appellants have to be treated as input services eligible for Cenvat credit

  ---

1 ....2345678910