Excise Duty Act, Rules Articles News Notification Circulars Instructions. Input Credit, Cenvat, Duty Rate, SSI Exemption, Excise on Jewellery,Excise on Garment
Excise Duty : The Supreme Court upholds CENVAT credit for telecom infrastructure, ruling in favor of telecom operators on towers and shelters....
Excise Duty : The MOOWR scheme offers deferred duties, export benefits, and operational ease for manufacturers in India, aiding growth but facin...
Excise Duty : Understand windfall tax, imposed on oil and gas companies due to unforeseen profit gains. Learn its implications and why India int...
Excise Duty : Explore the legal intricacies of challenging the Excise Department's notice for a public limited company's change in management vi...
Excise Duty : Explore the Madras High Courts decision in India Cement Limited v. Commissioner of Customs, allowing Cenvat credit for electricity...
Excise Duty : Govt clarifies tax increase on tobacco products, citing changes in excise duty on cigarettes and GST rules. Revenue funds overall ...
Excise Duty : Supreme Court admits Ecoboard Industries Ltd.'s appeal on excise duty for intermediate products, questioning Tribunal's duty impo...
Excise Duty : Key changes in excise duty and Clean Environment Cess under Finance (No. 2) Bill, 2024, including extended deadlines and exemption...
Excise Duty : Case Title: M/s. Marwadi Shares and Finance Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors.; Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 27124/2023; Dat...
Excise Duty : CBIC, under the Ministry of Finance, seeks feedback on the proposed Central Excise Bill 2024. Stakeholders can submit suggestions ...
Excise Duty : Analysis of CESTAT Kolkata's decision in Mahavir Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Vs CGST & Central Excise, focusing on alleged clandestine ...
Excise Duty : CESTAT Kolkata allows CENVAT Credit to Rexon Strips Ltd., ruling that inputs used in capital goods are eligible, setting aside pri...
Excise Duty : Appellant and SKF India are both subsidiaries of AB SKF Sweden. Appellant & SKF India have agreed to pool & combine their respecti...
Excise Duty : The Settlement Commission held that the rectification of errors under Section 154 was confined to arithmetical or clerical errors ...
Excise Duty : Supreme Court held that the agreement between the oil marketing companies indicates that the price of petroleum products agreed un...
Excise Duty : Govt extends provisions under Excise Notification 11/2017 from 2025 to 2026. Changes take effect on February 2, 2025....
Excise Duty : Notification 01/2025 outlines appointments and roles of Central Excise Officers for handling appeals under the Excise Act, specify...
Excise Duty : The Ministry of Finance rescinds Central Excise Notification No. 08/2022 with immediate effect under public interest provisions....
Excise Duty : The Ministry of Finance amends Central Excise Rules, 2017, removing specific provisos in Rules 18 and 19. Changes take effect imme...
Excise Duty : The Ministry of Finance rescinds Central Excise Notifications No. 10/2022 and 11/2022 under Notification No. 30/2024, effective im...
Hitachi Home And Life Solutions India Ltd. Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The CESTAT, Ahmedabad bench has held that the cenvat credit cannot be denied on warranty services provided free of cost during the warranty period. The appellants approached the Tribunal challenging the order of the department denying Cenvat Credit of services provided by […]
Unitech International Vs C.C.C. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The fact of the case are that the appellant is a 100% EOU and have cleared paper waste after segregation process of waste imported during the period October, 2003 to January, 2005 on payment of excise duty by availing the benefit of concessional Notification No. 23/2003 dated […]
Considering the importance of pre dispute consultation and acting on the recommendation of TARC report government brought the concept of Pre show cause consultation before issuance of final show cause notice with the idea to reduce the burden of unnecessary litigation which will help both department and tax payer.
TIDC India Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) To claim Cenvat Credit primarily the service should be first covered under the definition of ‘input service’ and once the service is not covered due to exclusion clause irrespective of the fact whether the cost of service has been taken as expenditure in […]
Indo Tooling Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT finds that payment of service tax including the cess relating to the period prior to 30.06.2017, paid in the year 2018 during the GST regime, amounts to payment in accordance with law as the same has been paid on the insistence […]
Kay Pan Sugandh Pvt. Ltd. Vs Director General of GST Intelligence (Chhattisgarh High Court) Petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacturing of pan masala of various brand names and retail sale price. From the pleadings made in writ petition, it is clear that petitioner got installed different PMPMs of different MRPs at its factory […]
(a) whether the Government has assessed the impact of rising excise duties and taxes on fuel/liquefied petroleum gas on income inequality; (b) if so, the details of the incidence of fuel excise duties on varying income groups of the population;
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd (CESTAT Mumbai) First and foremost point to be considered is that whether Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 prohibits issue of two registration certificates for one and the same premises that formed the basis of the adjudication order? On a bare reading of Rule […]
Mangalam Cement Ltd. Vs Commissioner, Central Excise & CGST (CESTAT Delhi) Appeal is filed against denial of cenvat credit of service tax taken by the appellant on maintenance and repair work of their residential colony on the ground that the said service has no nexus with the manufacture of final product. Rule 2(l) of Cenvat […]
Refund of CVD and SAD in question is allowable, as credit is no longer available under the GST regime, which was however available under the erstwhile regime of Central Excise prior to 30.06.2017. Accordingly, I hold that the appellant is entitled to refund under the provisions of Section 142(3) and (6) of the CGST Act.
