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 issue was denial of credit due to post-amendment invoicing. The Tribunal held that credit is admissible since services were completed before the cut-off date.
The judgment clarifies that subsequent departmental communications do not extend limitation periods. The appeal must be filed against the original order within statutory timelines.
The Tribunal held that penalty cannot be imposed where the appellant merely acted as a broker without handling goods. Absence of possession or direct involvement made Rule 26 inapplicable.
The Court directed authorities to reconsider the petitioner’s application under the scheme. It noted that a co-noticee had already received relief under the same proceedings.
The Tribunal held that input service credit is fully admissible before 01.04.2011 but restricted thereafter for construction-related services. It clarified eligibility based on amended exclusion provisions.
The case examined whether procedural violations in transfers between EOUs justify duty demands. The Tribunal held that such lapses alone are insufficient and remanded the matter for fresh verification.
Clandestine removal could not be sustained on mere assumptions or third-party statements without corroborative evidence and statutory compliance under Section 9D.
Madras High Court held that appropriation of refund made during pendency of an appeal is construed as payment of duty under protest and hence period of limitation doesn’t apply in such case. Accordingly, appeal stand allowed and order is set aside.
The Tribunal ruled that penalties under relevant provisions were unjustified since the credit was lawfully availed. The decision reinforces that penalties cannot stand without a valid underlying demand.
The Tribunal held that CENVAT credit cannot be denied merely for non-submission of challans when supplier certification and evidence of tax payment exist. The ruling clarifies that substantive compliance prevails over procedural lapses.
