Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Simbhaoli Sugars Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow

2017 (9) TMI 769 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Benefit of N/N. 67/1995-CE - case of Revenue is that in the manufacture of denatured spirit, rectified spirit got generated and rectified spirit is not specified in the first schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, denying the benefit of notific .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ellant. - E/52837/2015-EX[DB] - Final Order No. 70803/2017 - Dated:- 8-8-2017 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Kapil Vaish (CA) for Appellant Shri Pawan Kumar Singh (Supdt.) AR for Respondent .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ar and Molasses and Rectified Spirit and Denatured Spirit. The molasses manufactured in the sugar units were used in the refinery for manufacture of denatured spirit. Further, the appellant cleared molasses manufactured in sugar unit to distillery by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ied spirit is not specified in the first schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Therefore, in between the manufacture of excisable goods and non excisable goods got manufactured and, therefore, appellant was not entitled for benefit of said Not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

,880/- should not be recovered from them for the period from August, 2012 to March, 2013. Further, there was a proposal to deny benefit of Notification No. 67/1995-CE and demand Central Excise Duty of ₹ 1,55,34,975/-. In addition, there was a 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

d by the said order appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant who has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Bajaj Hindusthan Sugar Ltd. v/s Commissioner of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| 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