Excise Duty judiciary-2

Mere inadmissibility of Credit availed not enough to allege Suppression of Facts

Medisray Laboratories P. Ltd. Vs CCGST (CESTAT Mumbai)

Medisray Laboratories P. Ltd. Vs CCGST (CESTAT Mumbai) Coming to the statutory audit procedure, the purpose of audit, as available in the Manual published by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India in respect of EA audit and CERA audit under Chapter 17 is that the idea behind such conduct of verification is to reasonably […...

Read More

Cenvat credit not to be reversed on waste or by-product generation during manufacturing

M/s Shri Vitthalsai S.S.K. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai)

If any input is contained in waste by-product or goods the cenvat credit shall not be denied. If rule 6(3) is made applicable in these goods this clarification will stand redundant....

Read More

Central Excise Officers of DGCEI have all India jurisdiction : Delhi HC

National Building Construction Company Limited Vs Union Of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

National Building Construction Company Limited Vs Union Of India & Ors. (High Court Delhi) Delhi High Court held as under: (i) Central Excise Officers of DGCEI have all India jurisdiction and can issue notices and enquire into the matters relating to service-tax against any assessee/ person even if the said person or assessee is regis...

Read More

Towers and Shelters are not Immovable Properties: Cenvat Credit allowed

Vodafone Mobile Services Limited Vs Commissioner Of Service Tax (Delhi High Court)

Vodafone Mobile Services Limited Vs Commissioner Of Service Tax (Delhi High Court) Tribunal had denied CENVAT credit to the assessee on the premise that the towers erected result into an immovable property, which is erroneous and contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Solid and Correct Engineering (supra). The towers...

Read More

Cinder is non-excisable commodity: CESTAT Chennai

Shri Nataraj Ceramics & Chemical Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)

Cinder will continue to be a non-excisable commodity during the period of dispute, notwithstanding subsequent amendment to Section 2(d) ibid w.e.f. 10.05.2008....

Read More

Tractor Cess not leviable on part and accessories of Tractor

M/s Gatiman Auto Pvt. Limited Vs CCE & CGST, Indore (CESTAT Delhi)

M/s Gatiman Auto Pvt. Limited Vs CCE & CGST (CESTAT Delhi) The issue before us is to decided as to whether the tractor cess is leviable on the part and component of the tractor cleared by the appellant. After going through the case laws cited and circular issued by the Ministry of Finance, it is […]...

Read More

CESTAT condones delay of 23 Days subject to payment of cost to Kerala CM Relief Fund

M/s Parvatiya Plywood Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CGST, CC & CE, Dehradun (CESTAT Delhi)

We find that delay is explained to some part. However, in the interest of justice, we condone the delay subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5000/- payable in ‘Kerala Chief Minister Relief Fund’ on or before 1st November, 2018...

Read More

Reverse Cenvat credit on bottles procured from sister units & sold in market: CESTAT

M/s Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Hyderabad)

M/s Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Hyderabad) The facts of the case in dispute are that the appellant availed on common input services and goods and obtained to the services reversed under Rule 6(3A). The only questions to be decided are a) whether the value of the goods […]...

Read More

Refund of Proprietary Concern can’t be adjusted towards Demand of Partnership concern

M/s Shri Mahavir Industries Vs CGST (CESTAT Delhi)

M/s Shri Mahavir Industries Vs CGST (CESTAT Delhi) A proprietary unit is an individual legal entity and any refunds due to the proprietary unit cannot be adjusted or appropriated towards the demand which may be pending recovery against an another independent legal entity, of which the proprietor of unit is a partner. It has to […]...

Read More

Cenvat Credit on Club Membership for business & Life Insurance for Employees eligible

Rohit Surfactant Pvt Ltd Vs CGST, C.C & C.E. (CESTAT Delhi)

Rohit Surfactant Pvt Ltd Vs CGST, C.C & C.E- UJJAIN (CESTAT Delhi) It is seen that the Cenvat Credits have been disallowed by the lower authority, vide the impugned order, by observing that the services fall within the exclusion category specified in Rule 2 (I) (C). This exclusion clause disallows the Cenvat Credit in respect [&hellip...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,965)
Company Law (4,202)
Custom Duty (7,153)
DGFT (3,827)
Excise Duty (4,174)
Fema / RBI (3,569)
Finance (3,776)
Income Tax (28,574)
SEBI (3,018)
Service Tax (3,420)

Featured Posts