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

2017 (5) TMI 809 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2017 (5) TMI 809 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Statement in the Form specified in Annexure 19 as prescribed in para 13.2 of Part II of Chapter 7 of CBEC Manual of Supplementary Instructions - the assessee’s contention is that the statement is not substantive requirement under the N/N. 42/2001-CE (NT) - Held that: - This matter is covered by the Tribunal’s decision in appellant’s own case [2015 (2) TMI 1093 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], where it was held thatthe appellant is not required to file details as p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/s. Special Spring India Pvt. Ltd. and others are in appeal against Order in Appeal No. 216-218/2016 dated 14.9.16 wherein demand of Central Excise duty of ₹ 3,06,469/- along with equivalentpenalty has been sustained against the appellant. Additional penalties have been imposed on Director and authorized signatory of the appellant assessee who are also in appeal against the said penalties. 2. Both sides have been heard, represented by learned Counsels, Shri Ravinder Singh for the appellant .....

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 statements by the assessee in the Form specified as mentioned above. However, the assessee s contention is that the statement is not substantive requirement under the notification No.. 42/2001-CE (NT). This matter is covered by the Tribunal s decision in appellant s own case in Excise Appeal No. 57859 of 2013-SM vide Final Order No. A/50641/2015 Ex (SM) dated 24.2.2015. The Tribunal in the said decision observes as under: 3. As the appellant was not filing the said statement in Annexure 19 al .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tructions cannot overrule the notification. Therefore, later on Revenue cannot declare the LOU invalid. To support his contention. He relied on Hon ble Apex Court decision in the case of Sandur Micro Circuits Ltd. vs. CCE, Belgaum [ 2008 (229) ELT 641 (SC)]. wherein the Hon ble Apex Court has observed that exemption notification cannot be whittle down Exemption Notification and restrict scope of Exemption Notification. He also relied on the decision of this Tribunal in their own case reported as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ties have rightly declared the LOU invalid. 7. In this case, the short issue involved before me is that whether the said instructions issued under Rule 31 shall prevail ; over the notification issued by the CBEC or not. The issue came up before the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Sandur Micro Circuits (supra) wherein the Hon ble Apex Court has held in 5. The issue relating to effectiveness of a Circular contrary to a Notification statutorily issued has been examined by this Court in several ca .....

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