Excise Duty Act, Rules Articles News Notification Circulars Instructions. Input Credit, Cenvat, Duty Rate, SSI Exemption, Excise on Jewellery,Excise on Garment
Excise Duty : India reduced excise duty on petrol and diesel to offset rising global crude prices due to geopolitical tensions. The move aimed t...
Excise Duty : Health Security & National Security (HSNS) Cess Act, 2025 introduces a standalone statutory cess aimed at funding national health ...
Excise Duty : The Court upheld the Tribunal’s view that interest cannot be levied when duty paid is fully creditable to downstream units. It c...
Excise Duty : The Court held that duty-paid items supplied directly to site are not includible when the final plant is immovable. The key takeaw...
Excise Duty : Discover how the Central Excise (Amendment) Act, 2025 revamps tobacco taxation, introducing steep excise duties on cigarettes, che...
Excise Duty : CBI Court in Siliguri sentences former Central Excise Superintendent to four years RI and Rs. 40,000 fine in a bribery case regist...
Excise Duty : A special court imposed five years’ rigorous imprisonment and heavy fines after finding assets far beyond known income. The ruli...
Excise Duty : The FAQs confirm that cess is computed on maximum rated machine speed rather than actual production. This ensures certainty in tax...
Excise Duty : The FAQs clarify how excise duty on chewing tobacco, jarda, and gutkha will be levied based on packing machine capacity rather tha...
Excise Duty : CESTAT issues instructions for e-filing appeals, detailing registration, filing process, documents, fees, and compliance with Proc...
Excise Duty : CESTAT Mumbai held that Rule 16(2) of the Central Excise Rules does not mandate that remanufactured goods be supplied back to the ...
Excise Duty : CESTAT Delhi held that works contract services used for repair and maintenance of existing plant and machinery qualify as input se...
Excise Duty : CESTAT Chennai held that exports made under Notification No. 30/2004-CE and the DEPB scheme cannot be included in exempted turnove...
Excise Duty : The Tribunal held that the show cause notice issued more than three years after the Department became aware of the facts was time-...
Excise Duty : CESTAT held that where the value of goods sent for job work had already been considered for credit reversal purposes, including it...
Excise Duty : The Lakshadweep Excise Regulation, 2026 establishes a comprehensive framework for licensing, manufacture, sale, transport, and con...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 25/2026 revises SAED on ATF exports to Rs 9.5 per litre with effect from 1 June 2026; domestic petrol and diesel ...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 24/2026 revises SAED rates on petrol and diesel exports from 1 June 2026, setting duty at Rs 1.5 and Rs 13.5 per ...
Excise Duty : CBIC revised SAED on ATF exports to Rs. 16 per litre effective 16 May 2026, impacting aviation fuel exporters and export duty cost...
Excise Duty : The Ministry of Finance amended the central excise notification issued in March 2026 by revising rates applicable to specified goo...
Cenvat credit in respect of input to be claimed within six months from the duty paying document with effect from 01.09.2014. [ Notification no. 21/2014- Central Excise dated 11.07.2014 ]- insertion of third proviso to rule 4(1).
No reversal of Cenvat credit on inputs in case of slump sale of on-going factory along with raw materials, packing materials etc., as there is no removal from factory.
In the instant case, Sanjay Industrial Corporation (the Appellant) was engaged in profile cutting viz. cutting larger size plates into small size and shapes using gas cutting machines, as per requirements of customers. The Department invoked extended period of limitation alleging that the process carried out by Appellant amount to manufacture and thus exigible to Excise duty.
In the Instant case, the Department alleged undervaluation and clandestine clearances on ground that Synfab Sales (the Respondent) was clearing the goods from its factory gate at very low value in the name of non-existing firms, while the goods were actually being cleared to godown at Bhiwandi (Maharashtra) and Surat (Gujarat) from where they are subsequently being sold through brokers to actual buyers at a higher value.
Notification No. 32/2015-Central Excise Dated- 4th June, 2015 Ethanol produced from molasses generated from cane crushed in the sugar season 2015-16 i.e. 1st October, 2015 onwards, for supply to the public sector oil marketing companies, namely, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. or Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., for the purposes of blending with petrol.
We are sharing with you an important judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise, Aurangabad Vs. Roofit Industries Ltd. [(2015) 57 taxmann.com 363 (SC)]on the following issue
The cases where refund arises due to order of Commissioner (Appeals) or Commissioner of Central Excise/ Customs and decision is taken to contest them before CEGAT. In such cases appeal/ stay application should be filed expeditiously well before the expiry of stipulated period of three months (and not waiting for the last date of filing of appeal). However, no refund/ rebate claim should be withheld on the ground that an appeal has been filed against the order giving the relief, unless stay order has been obtained.
In the Annexure to the said notification, in List 11, in item No. 48, for the letters STPP, the letters TPP shall be substituted.
Addition of Mundra Port in para vii of Notification No. 44/2001-CE (NT) dated 26.06.2001 – In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (3) read with sub-rule (2) of rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, the Central Government hereby makes the following amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, No. 44/2001-Central Excise (N.T.), dated the 26th June, 2001, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 473(E), dated the 26th June, 2001, namely:-
The Hon’ble Apex Court held that it is clear that by letter dated April 15, 2002, the original purchase order dated October 31, 2001 was novated insofar as price was concerned, which is before the date of removal of goods from the factory premises in May, 2002. Since duty has been paid on the basis of the original price in the purchase order, the difference between the said rate and the reduced rate has to be refunded.
