Rajesh Kumar Narula Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT find that there is no dispute about the fact that the period involved in the present case is 2004-05. The offence of issuing bogus LR can at the most fall under the provision of Rule 26(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. However, the said provision […]
If appellant have not availed Cenvat credit in respect of input service used in exempted goods and if at all the same is availed and subsequently reversed proportionate credit, the assessee is not required to pay 5%/ 10%.
Cenvat credit eligible in respect of Cement, TMT bars, MS angles, channels, beams, racks, plates, etc. used for making foundation of machineries installed in the factory premises and also for making structures for support of the plant.
J M Huber India Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Commission Agent Service provided to foreign based entity for promoting/marketing their goods in India on consideration the activity of the Indian agent providing promotion/marketing, technical support, installation, commission, etc. for sale of goods of foreign based entities in India on commission basis amounts […]
Trenching pipeline installed partly in SEZ and partly outside but for use in operation of the SEZ is admissible and the refund of the same is clearly admissible.
B M Autolink Vs C.C.E.-Kutch (Gandhidham) (CESTAT Ahmedabad) We find that the fact is not under dispute that the appellant being a dealer purchase the vehicles from M/s. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. and subsequently sell the same to various customers. The transaction between M/s. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. and the dealer and subsequently sale transaction […]
Kohler India Corporation Private Limited vs C.C.E. & S.T (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The facts of the case, in brief, are that a team of Central Excise Officers visited the factory premises of appellant and documents related to Cenvat Credit availed on services received from various service providers were called. Upon the examination of the appellant’s records/ […]
Alkem Laboratories Ltd. Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules prescribes that if for ‘Any reason’ the use of the said credit is not possible, the manufacturer or provider of the output service shall be allowed refund of such amount. The sole reason for denying the refund claim is […]
CESTAT held that, the refund cannot be denied on the ground of double benefit to Appellant due to non-transfer of unutilized CENVAT credit. Further, interest was allowed under Section 11BB of Central Excise Act, 1944 for delay of refund.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that as assessment of shipping bills has attained finality, classification of goods cannot be questioned subsequently by the Customs.
