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...
Shri Krsna Urja Project Pvt Ltd. Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT Delhi held that there was no legal basis for adopting cost inflation index of Income Tax dept for determination of assessable value under Section 4 of CE Act read with the CE Valuation Rules, 2000, for valuation of captively consumed goods. The Tribunal also […]
Once the workers come into the factory their services are used in relation to the manufacture of final products. But bringing workers to the factory or providing accommodation to them outside the factory or providing any other welfare measures for the workers or their families have no nexus with the manufacture of the final products, although they are welfare measures meant for the general well being of the workers who manufacture the goods.
Items falling under Chapter 170490 are entitled for exemption under Sugar Confectionary (excluding white chocolate and bubble gum). Admittedly, the goods manufactured by the appellants (Parle 2-in-1 Eclairs & Kismi Toffee ) are Sugar Confectionary is neither chocolate nor bubble gum.
Brief facts are that the appellants are manufacturers of Transformer oil, Petroleum jelly and light liquid paraffin and are availing the facility of Cenvat credit on service tax paid on various input services. During the disputed period, they had availed credit of service tax paid on courier services for sending the samples of their products to buyers in foreign countries. The department was of the view that these are export of goods as the courier services is akin to outward transportation of finished goods from factory gate to the customer’s premises and therefore is not eligible for credit
In the instant case supplies of goods were made by the petitioner to other divisions of MSSL which had a status of EOUs. The pivotal point is that the FTP 2009-2014 conferred a right on the petitioner, who, admittedly, was a DTA supplier, at the relevant point in time, to seek refund of TED, as the supplies had been made to 100% EOUs, albeit, under a non-ICB route.
M/s. Rane Brake Lining Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Puducherry (CESTAT Chennai) The first issue that arises for consideration is whether the appellant is eligible for credit of the service tax (ST) paid on product liability insurance. The department has denied the same on the ground that it is post-manufacturing activity and […]
on’ble High Court further directed that the appellants while preferring second appeal before the Tribunal are required to deposit 10% of the amount of duty/penalty as confirmed by the Appellate Authority inclusive of 7.5% pre-deposit made for the first appeal and that 10% would not be in addition to and over and above 7.5% of pre-deposit made for the first appeal.
Question raised in the present writ petition is whether as per Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (C.E. Act, for short) the petitioner-assessee on filing of second appeal before the Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) is required to make an additional pre-deposit of 10% of the duty and penalty in dispute, over and above 7.5% pre-deposit made for filing of first appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals).
The Ramco Cements Limited Vs CCT (CESTAT Hyderabad) It is not in dispute that the welding electrodes are used for repair and maintenance of capital goods within the factory of manufacturer and these capital goods are used for manufacture of the final product although the relationship is remote and not direct. So by no stretch of imagination can […]
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs M/s Grasim Industries Ltd. (Supreme Court of India) It was held that measure of the levy contemplated in Section 4 of the Act will not be controlled by the nature of the levy. So long a reasonable nexus is discernible between the measure and the nature of the levy both […]
