Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise 2008 2008 2008 (7) Central Excise - 2008 (7) 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 301 to 320 of 326 Records

• 2008 (7) TMI 90 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
  

  Eligibility for refund – Area based exemption – question whether impugned goods are manufactured products or not should be verified before granting refund – if goods are not excisable registration will be cancelled and refund will be given – if goods are excisable, duty would be refunded under Area Based Notification - authorities have to take a holistic view regarding the Registration granted to them and the question as to whether the impugned goods are excisable or not

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 89 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Allegation that assessee fradulently availed Modvat credit without physically receiving the goods - RT-12 returns have been assessed finally by the Range Officer which contains all the documents including the invoices under dispute on the basis of which the Credit has been availed and utilised and that payments for the purchase of the inputs have been made through cheque/demand draft – no question of law, much less substantial, arises from the order of the Tribunal - revenue appeal dismissed

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 88 - HIGH COURT PUNJAB & HARYANA
  

  Refund – amount deposited during investigation i.e. during search and seizure - petitioner has submitted that there is no amount outstanding against the petitioner but still under duress and threat, the partners of the petitioner were forced to deposit – revenue is directed to refund the impugned amount deposited by the petitioner during investigation – department is not justified in retaining impugned amount in absence of demand raised

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 83 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Tribunal in its impugned order has exceeded its jurisdiction by recording a finding that ‘GSL’, appellant is a ‘related person’ with ‘PGG’ - tribunal’s finding that the advertisement charges incurred by PGG can be loaded to the assessable value of the soaps manufactured by GSL is beyond the scope of SCN - order of the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Tribunal

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 79 - HIGH COURT RAJASTHAN
  

  Excisibility of Waste and Scrap arising out of cutting of M.S. Sheet Plates for repair and maintenance of the plant and machinery - Any process incidental to completion of manufactured product also amounts to manufacture – so, activity of bringing about a “part” in work-shop by mechanical process (from plated and sheets) amount to manufacture – hence waste and scrap arising due to manufacturing of spare parts are excisable – revenue’s appeal allowed

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 78 - CESTAT MUMBAI-LB
  

  Suo moto refund – excess paid duty - appellant’s contention that refund in respect of duty paid twice cannot be considered as refund of duty and is only the accounting error, is not acceptable - PLA account and the credit accounts are required to be submitted to the department and any correction carried therein, need to have department’s sanction - there is no provision under CEA/CER allowing suo moto taking of credit/refund without sanction by the proper officer

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 77 - SUPREME COURT
  

  SSI exemption under Notification No.1/93 - respondent-companies submitted that all the three units were in existence and were independent of each other - flow back of money from one unit to another & mutuality of interest not proved by dept. - held that the respondents had disclosed all the material facts, as regards their constitution and functioning and it could not be said that they had suppressed any material facts - clubbing of clearances not justified – larger period not invokable

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 74 - HIGH COURT BOMBAY
  

  Petitioner is praying for interim relief, thus, seeks stay of the operation of the notifications imposing production based duty on notified goods (Pan masala & gutkha) – appellant seek stopping the recovery of tax - merely because the validity of the legislation is challenged, the operation of that legislation cannot be stayed – appellant has not proved that if stay is not granted he will suffer any injury – since there is no any exceptional circumstances, interim relief cannot be granted

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 68 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
  

  As per Rule 7(4) whether the differential amount of duty is paid prior to the date of finalization of provisional assessment or subsequent to that date, interest will have to be paid on that amount of duty for the period from the first day of the month succeeding the month for which the duty is determined, till the date of payment of differential duty - this view is in conflict with decision of coordinate Bench in Karnataka Vidyuth Karkhane Ltd. – matter referred to larger bench

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 67 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Point in dispute in the present appeal is concluded by two decisions of SC Court in Eicher Tractors Limited Haryana and Mirah Exports Pvt. Ltd. - Tribunal has also held that Revenue has not produced the evidence of contemporaneous imports in terms of identical goods of same nature, quantity & quality – finding recorded by the Tribunal is a pure finding of fact which cannot be interfered with by this Court – Appeal of revenue is dismissed

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 64 - HIGH COURT PUNJAB AND HARYANA
  

  Credit denied alleging that the same was taken against invalid documents – credit denied on the ground that prior to 1.4.94 invoice issued u/r 52A of CER was not a prescribed document - in terms of the Notification 15/94 dated 3.30.94 read with Circular 76/76/94, the invoice in question was a valid document – the invoice/documents issued by a manufacturer from his depot has been recognized as valid documents – credit can’t be denied on ground that Notification was made effective w.e.f. 1.4.94

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 63 - HIGH COURT CALCUTTA
  

  Tribunal directed to refund the amount in cash in respect of the personal ledger account (PLA) - authorities unjustly stopped the realization of the said fund in favour of the respondent and thereby failed to act in accordance with natural justice - Tribunal after going through the records and materials placed before it has correctly come to the conclusion of cash refund of amount lying in PLA – order of tribunal is justified – revenue’s appeal is dismissed

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 62 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Pan Masala - issue involved is regarding the correct assessable value of the products and the suppression of the said correct assessable value by the respondents – tribunal decided that demand is time barred - order passed by the Tribunal that in view of the earlier order passed by the Tribunal which has attained finality, department was not justified in issuing the present show cause notice and the same is barred by limitation as well as by the principle of res judicata

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Credit on low Sulphur heavy stock (LSHS) used in the manufacture of steam which in turn was used for the manufacture of the final product, namely, fertilizer which was fully exempt from payment of excise duty – issue is settled in favor of assessee by tribunal in similar cases – since revenue not filed appeal against those decision, those orders attained finality due to non-filing of appeal – hence credit is allowable

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 55 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
  

  Credit on welding electrodes – credit denied on ground that welding electrodes do not fall under any of the heads mentioned in Rule 2 of CCR – revenue plea is that goods are used for repairing/maintenance of the capital goods, are not eligible for credit - assessee pleaded that electrodes are accessories of machinery for soldering, brazing or welding so they are eligible as capital good for credit – welding electrodes are covered under the definition of capital goods – credit is entitled

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 53 - HIGH COURT BOMBAY
  

  Application for rectification of mistake – remand order of tribunal is under challenge - remand of the matter merely because one of the party makes a request (for grant of an opportunity to lead further evidence) will not be proper exercise of the judicial powers - tribunal remanded matter without considering the facts – In the rectification application, the tribunal could not have changed its order from remand to dismissal of the appeal - matter remanded to tribunal for de novo consideration

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 52 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Allegation that respondents had been evading duty on cigarettes consciously & deliberately manufacturing deceptively similar version of certain regular brand showing lower sale price as compared with that of the regular brand – allegation that appellant is receiving difference between the two S.P. by means of “flow back” - Tribunal has not recorded any finding regarding the flow back – finding recorded by the Tribunal on the question of limitation is also not satisfactory – matter remanded

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 37 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
  

  Classification of “MILKYBAR CHOO” – Even if impugned item is containing “Hydro generated vegetable oil”, it can’t be classified as “sugar confectionery” as contended by assessee – impugned goods conforms to the definition of ‘White Chocolate’ as per HSN Notes to Chapter 17 so it is classifiable as “White chocolate” – duty @ 16 % is payable by assessee – exemption under notification no. 6/2002 is not allowable – HSN Notes should be given greater consideration than other statutes

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 36 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
  

  Delay in constituting Review Committee (resulting in huge revenue loss) has to be explained before Tribunal - When a court is left with an unavoidable impression that important aspects of the case was not satisfactorily brought out clearly by materials on record, that requires a Court to find truth through process of summon & affidavits - Section 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure have empowered Tribunal to exercise powers of a Civil Court in this respect while hearing Appeal

  ---

• 2008 (7) TMI 33 - HIGH COURT DELHI
  

  Once the Tribunal had quashed OIO on the ground of denial of natural justice (petitioner had been denied an opportunity of hearing by commissioner), Tribunal ought not to have imposed condition of deposit of 30.00 lacs - no penalty leviable against appellant after the setting aside of OIO - when appellant is seeking opportunity of hearing, deposit of 30 lacs is harsh - Commissioner shall hear the appellant as directed by the Tribunal, but without requiring the appellant to deposit 30 lacs

  ---

1 ....121314151617