GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (9) TMI 1083 - SUPREME COURT

2015 (9) TMI 1083 - SUPREME COURT - 2015 (323) E.L.T. 220 (SC) - Benefit of exemption Notification No. 06/2002-CE dated 01.03.2002 - Whether windmill doors and electrical boxes are components and/or parts of wind operated electricity generators - Held that:- As far as windmill doors or tower doors are concerned, it is a safety device which is used as security for high voltage equipments fitted inside the tower, preventing unauthorised access and preventing entries of reptiles, insects, etc., ins .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

her, since the tower is held as part of the generator, door thereof has to be necessarily a part of the generator. - No case of interference is made out - Decided against Revenue. - Civil Appeal No. 1218 of 2006, Civil Appeal No. 5821 of 2013 - Dated:- 13-8-2015 - Mr. A.k. Sikri and Mr. Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Adv., Ms. Sunita Rani Singh, Adv., Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. V. Lakshmikumaran, Adv., M .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e is about the classification under the aforesaid Rules in which show cause notice dated 02.09.2003 was issued for the period from 01.03.2000 to 30.08.2000. Since it was beyond the prescribed period of limitation contained in Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, longer period of limitation under proviso to Section 11A of the Act was invoked. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'CESTAT') Gulshan Kumar Arorahas allowed the appeal of the Resp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oner of Central Excise reported in 1999 (114) ELT 429 (Ti-LB) by the adjudicating authority is not relevant, inasmuch as the issue before the Larger Bench in that case was entirely different. The Larger Bench was considering the question of invocation of longer period, where during the relevant period there was admittedly suppression, which came to the notice of the revenue subsequently and as to whether in such situation, subsequent knowledge on the part of the revenue would curtail down the lo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version