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...
CESTAT Chandigarh held that the interest of justice would be properly served if the case goes back to the Adjudicating Authority to adjudicate the case afresh as not allowing the cross-examination of key witnesses vitiates the proceedings.
CESTAT Allahabad held that CENVAT Credit of materials used for fabrication work of machines which are capital goods is duly available in terms of rule 3 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
CESTAT Chennai held that boiler in unassembled form is removed in several lots on different dates doesn’t mean that parts only and not the whole boiler is cleared from factory. The parts are to be classified as complete machine under 8402.10. Hence, exemption vide Sl.No.84 of Notification No.6/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006 as amended duly available.
Explore CESTAT Chennai’s decision in Emerson Process Management Chennai case. Learn about duty on intermediate goods, Rule 6(6) of CCR 2004, and implications for manufacturers
Held that the goods were brought in the factory premises without having proper invoices/documents with intent to clear them clandestinely. Accordingly, confiscation and the redemption fine as well as the penalty imposed u/s. 11 AC of Central Excise Act read with Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 is absolutely justified.
In a recent case, Hindustan Zinc Ltd Vs C.c.e. Jaipur, the Rajasthan High Court has decided that welding electrodes used for maintenance and repair are inputs and not part of the manufacturing process.
Meghalaya High Court held that extended period of limitation as per proviso to section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 not invocable as there was no element of deceit or intention on the part of the assessee to evade duty.
India’s Supreme Court orders the conclusion of a decade-old case involving CENVAT credit demand within eight weeks. Learn more about the historic ruling of Commissioner vs Swati Menthol and Allied Chemicals Ltd.
CESTAT Chandigarh rules in favour of the Department in a case involving refund claims filed under Section 27 of the Customs Act. The tribunal asserts that duty was correctly paid and unjust enrichment was not established.
CESTAT held that Commissioner (Appeals) had overstepped his bounds by reviewing a Tribunal’s order that had already gained finality due to lack of appeal. Department’s selective application of review processes was criticized as a mockery of judicial process.
