This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Mere use of words ‘willfully suppressed’ not enough to validate show cause notice
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Commissioner of Cenral Excise Vs Tata Steel Limited (Calcutta High Court)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All High Courts, Calcutta High Court
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Commissioner of Cenral Excise Vs Tata Steel Limited (Calcutta High Court)
Facts- The respondent assessee is a manufacturer of Ball and Roller bearing classifiable under Sub-heading No. 8482 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.The respondent assessee upon availing Cenvat Credit on the duty paid, a part of such raw materials procured by them is sent out for processing work to job workers. After processing is completed, the races are brought back factory which are used in the manufacture of bearings. The waste and scrap generated are not brought back but duty and cess was being paid by the res...






