Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The Commissioner of Central Excise Customs and Service Tax Large Tax Payers Unit Bengaluru Versus M/s BEML Limited, Sri M Pitchiah Director – Finance, Sri M Pradeep Swaminathan Executive Director – Finance and Sri AK Halder Executive Director-Marketing

2015 (4) TMI 1141 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Period of limitation - Demand - non- payment of Central Excise Duty for the period 29.4.2010 to 31.3.2011 - SCN issued on 22.4.2013 - Held that:- although there are about dozen grounds taken in the appeal, but none specifically relates to any suppression of facts by the assessee. Even the questions of law which have been framed in the appeal do not specifically relate to suppression of facts. Admittedly, the appellant had paid the Central Excise Duty to the tune of ₹ 44 crores for the peri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd the period of one year cannot be justified in law. - Decided against the Revenue - C.E.A.No.58/2014 AND C.E.A.Nos.3-5/2015 - Dated:- 1-4-2015 - MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA For the Appellant : Sri.Y.Hariprasad, Adv. VINEET SARAN J. JUDGMENT These appeals have been filed challenging the order dated 16.6.2014 passed by the CESTAT, South zone bench, Bangalore, 2. The brief facts of this case are that the respondent- assessee is a Public Sector Undertaking engaged in the ma .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d have been, in the facts of the present case, issued beyond the prescribed period of one year as provided under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short Act ) 3. The admitted facts are that after the amendment which was brought in by Finance Act, 2011 and given retrospective effect from 29.4.2010 the respondent assessee was liable to pay duty on certain goods on which the assessee did pay the requisite duty from 1.4.2011. But according to the appellant- revenue, the respondent defa .....

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, other than the reason of fraud or collusion or any willful mis - statement or suppression of facts or contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or of the rule s made thereunder with intent to evade payment of duty,- (a) the Central Excise Officer shall, within one year from the relevant date , serve notice on the person chargeable with the duty which has not been so levied or paid or which has been so short-levied or short-paid or to whom the refund has erroneously been made, requiri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on of - (a) fraud; or (b) collusion; or (c) any willful mis-statement; or (d) suppression of facts ; or (e) contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or of the rules made thereunder with intent to evade payment of duty, by any person chargeable with the duty, the Central Excise Officer shall, within five years from the relevant date , serve notice on such person requiring him to show cause why he should not pay the amount specified in the notice along with interest payable thereon under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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