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 S.M. Dyechem Limited Versus CCE, Bhopal

2016 (11) TMI 576 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Recovery u/s 11D - amount shown collected as central excise duty while availing SSI exemption - Held that: - the appellants plea now is that these invoices are for stock transfer and they have not collected any duty from the buyers. No documentary/ supporting evidence to that effect has been produced before us. The appellant’s own invoices indicate Central Excise duty separately. Accordingly, we find no merit in the appeal. - Imposition of penalty - Held that: - the original authority impose .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the findings of the lower authority except for the modification of penalty as above. Appeal is partly allowed. - Excise Appeal No. 3267 of 2009 - Final Order No. 54014/2016 - Dated:- 7-10-2016 - (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President (J) And Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (T) Ms. Aastha Gupta, Advocate for the appellant Sh. Yogesh Agarwal, AR for the Respondent. Per: B. Ravichandran: The appeal is against order dated 09.09.2009 of Commissioner (Appeals), Bhopal. The appellant are engaged in the manufact .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r was confirmed. 2. We have heard both the sides and perused appeal records. The appellant claimed that they were rightly entitled to exemption under Notification No. 8/2002-CE. They have availed the said exemption available to SSI unit properly under intimation. The appellate authority gone beyond the show cause notice and confirmed the recovery under Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. They have transferred excisable goods on stock transfer invoices. There is no evidence that they hav .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t depot. Apparently, the appellant is adopting different criteria to contest tax liability without reference to the actual facts. Admittedly, when the goods were stock transferred to the depot the place of removal will be from depot and the expenditure of transport upto the place will necessarily form part of value. Further, we note the lower authority clearly recorded that the appellants have transferred the goods to their depot at lower rates then the rates prevailing at the depot and thereaft .....

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