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
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Beekay Engineering Corporation Versus CCE, Raipur

2015 (11) TMI 617 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Denial of 67% abatement claimed by it under Notification No. 15/2004-ST, 19/2005-ST and 1/2006-ST - CENVAT Credit - Held that:- In the case of Hello Minerals Water (2004 (7) TMI 98 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD) it was held in the context o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rt in the case of Dilip Chhabaria Designs (2015 (4) TMI 387 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) it is to state that in that case the credit was taken on duty paid on chassis and other inputs which was not utilised since the same lapsed due to the assessee no longer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n held that the said ratio of the judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of Hello Minerals (supra) continues to be applicable on the subject and the ratio stands confirmed by Supreme Court in the case of Sonalac Paints and Coatings Ltd. vs. CCE .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

echnical) Sh. Yogendra Adlak, Advocate : For the Petitioner Sh. Amresh Jain, DR : For the Respondent ORDER Per: R. K. Singh: Appeal has been filed against order-in-original dated 03.03.2009 in terms of which service tax demand of ₹ 92,27,535/- .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aken cenvat credit paid on various input services. The appellant has contended that it has reversed proportionate cenvat credit and interest and therefore in view of the Allahabad High Court judgement in Hello Minerals Water (P) Ltd. vs. Union of Ind .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ken it was not entitled to the benefit of 67% abatement regardless of whether the same was reversed subsequently and cited the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of CCE-Mumbai-IV vs. Dilip Chhabaria Designs Pvt. 2015-TIOL-851-HC-MUM-CX. 3. We .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent has been followed in the case of Amola Holdings (supra). As regards the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Dilip Chhabaria Designs (supra) it is to state that in that case the credit was taken on duty paid on chassis and other inputs wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version