Cenvat Credit - payment of duty where processing is not ...

Central Excise

August 8, 2016

Cenvat Credit - payment of duty where processing is not amounting to manufacture - they had cleared the fabrics cut to required sizes - payment of duty which was not less than cenvat credit taken on the fabrics - whether amount to reversal of credit - Held Yes - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Cenvat Credit - payment of duty where processing is not ...

Central Excise

August 8, 2016

You may also like:

Refund of unutilized Cenvat credit - Other than Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, there is no other provision either in Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 or in Central Excise...

CENVAT Credit - duty paying documents - Rule 9(1)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - CENVAT Credit on the basis of photocopy of seven bills of entry - Credit allowed - AT

Cenvat Credit - Outdoor catering - input services - Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules(CCR), 2004 – statutory obligation under the Factories Act

Cenvat Credit - pre-mature credit on input services - credit availed before making payment - Scope of Rule 4(7) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - credit cannot be denied - AT

Refund of CENVAT Credit under rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - Notification

Entitlement of Cenvat credit of duty paid on provisionally assessed Bill of Entry - Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules - Credit allowed..... - AT

Denial of CENVAT credit - though the appellant has availed CENVAT credit belatedly which is well within the provisions of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - credit allowed - AT

Denial of CENVAT Credit - Whether certain pollution control services availed by the appellant are eligible to CENVAT Credit under CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 - Held Yes,...

CENVAT credit - goods cleared to SEZ unit - Rule 6(6) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - the amendment carried out in Rule 6(6) by way of Notification No.50/2008 was retrospective.

CENVAT credit - levy of penalty - it was only with the insertion of Explanation III in rule 6(3) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 that the ineligibility became unambiguously...

Quick Updates: