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 →

Atul Products Ltd. Versus Commissioner of C. Ex. & Service Tax, Surat

2015 (4) TMI 1112 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

Period of limitation - Demand of duty - Sec. 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - time barred as per ground C-1 of their Memorandum of Appeal which was not argued by adjudicating authority - Held that:- it is found that their is a mistake apparent f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

been showing duty paid through PLA, RG-23A Part-II and set off claimed. The amount so debited was also shown collectively in the invoices. These facts are also coming clearly out of the Order-in-Original. Therefore, the appellant cannot be said to h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mistake rectified accordingly. - E/657/1995 - Misc. Order No. M/10727/2015-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 20-4-2015 - Shri P.K. Das, Member (J) and H.K. Thakur, Member (T) Shri Anand Nainawati, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri K. Sivakumar, Authorised Represent .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed the case in the light of Order No. I/113/2015, dated 18-3-2015. It was his case that under Order-in-Original No. 35/MP/75, dated 29-5-1995, an amount of ₹ 30,88,632.47 was also confirmed under Sec. 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. That t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

RG-23 was duly reflected as per price lists filed with the department from time to time, read with the sale invoices and GP.1s issued at the time of clearance and were also indicated in the RF-1s. He made the Bench go through copies of some of these .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

from the grounds of appeal and the Order-in-Original dated 29-5-1995 that appellant while filing appeal with CESTAT, Ahmedabad raised the issue of time bar with respect, to demand of ₹ 30,88,632.47, confirmed by the adjudicating authority unde .....

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