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 : The Karnataka High Court dismissed Revenue appeals challenging banks’ eligibility for CENVAT credit on service tax paid for depo...
Excise Duty : CESTAT Chennai held that strict transaction-wise correlation between factory clearances and retail sales was impractical in the je...
Excise Duty : The Tribunal held that invocation of the five-year limitation period requires proof of deliberate suppression or wilful misstateme...
Excise Duty : CESTAT Kolkata held that granules cleared to job workers for conversion into PPCP containers could not be treated as traded goods....
Excise Duty : Tribunal observed that where goods are sold on FOR destination basis, the buyer’s premises may constitute the place of removal. ...
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...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 21/2026-Central Excise revises the RIC rate on exports of high-speed diesel oil outside India to Nil, effective M...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 20/2026-Central Excise revises the SAED rate on exports of ATF outside India to Rs. 33 per litre, effective May 1...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 19/2026-Central Excise revises the SAED rate on exports of high-speed diesel oil outside India to Rs. 23 per litr...
The Tribunal held that credit depends on the nature of duty and not the rate at which it is paid. The key takeaway is that concessional CVD does not bar CENVAT credit.
The case addressed whether insurance services qualify as input services. The Tribunal held that insurance linked to business assets is eligible for Cenvat credit, emphasizing indirect nexus with manufacturing.
The issue was whether transportation and insurance charges should be excluded from assessable value. The Tribunal held they must be included since delivery occurred at the buyer’s premises, making them part of transaction value.
CESTAT Kolkata held that the charge of clandestine removal of goods cannot be proved on the basis of private records recovered during the course of investigation in the absence of any corroborative evidence in support. Accordingly, order set aside and appeal is allowed.
The Tribunal ruled that the Department failed to prove that goods classified as trading were actually manufactured by the assessee. In absence of proper investigation, excise demand and penalties were held unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that moulds and dies supplied by customers form part of assessable value as additional consideration. It clarified that their amortised cost must be included in valuation of finished goods.
The order highlights that both improper issuance of notices and incorrect application of law led to invalid recovery proceedings. The Tribunal set aside the demand and granted relief to the appellants.
The Tribunal ruled that payments made during investigation become duty once appropriated in adjudication. It rejected the argument that such payments remain deposits under protest. The decision reinforces that refund claims for such amounts are subject to limitation.
The Tribunal held that relationship alone is insufficient to reject transaction value without proof of price influence. It ruled that absence of such evidence invalidates demand and penalties.
The issue was whether penalty can be imposed without fraud or suppression. The Tribunal upheld penalty, holding that Rule 25 read with Section 11AC allows up to 10% penalty even without mens rea.
