Synfab Sales And Industries Ltd. Vs C.C.E & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) From the plain reading of the above rule 11(3) (i) (ii) it is clear that in terms of Clause (ii) of Rule 11(3) the balance credit shall lapse only if the assessee availed an exemption which is absolutely and exempted which is other than […]
Sunrise Traders Vs C.C.-Mundra (CESTAT Ahmedabad) To decide the correct classification of goods the commissioner held the Subheading 540751 to 540754 cover “other woven fabric, containing 85% or more weight of textured polyester filaments. For that the authority has relied upon report of ATIRA stating the fabric is made entirely of texturised yarn to be […]
Dolphin Metals I Ltd Vs C.C.E. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The brief facts of the case are that based on the intelligence, an investigation was undertaken against M/s Nisha Industries which revealed that the appellant had wrongly availed CENVAT credit on invoices without actual receipt of inputs; that the finished goods were found at both the manufacturing […]
Adroit Pharmachem Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Revenue submits that after 01.04.2011, construction service was excluded from the definition of ‘Input Service’ therefore, the appellant is not entitled for Cenvat credit. Appellant has already existing factory and in the said factory, Effluent Treatment Plant was installed for which they […]
Jayesh C Patel Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) There is no dispute in the fact that the appellants have entered into the contract for undertaking the manufacturing of Plastic Jars and containers in the factory of the Service recipient. The charges for the job is on per container basis, the appellants are not collecting […]
Arihant Tradelinks India Private Limited Vs C.C.E., Kutch (Gandhidham) (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Conclusion: In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal held that limitation period could not be invoked as the issue involved is purely of interpretation of Cenvat Credit Rules, levy of CVD in terms of Customs Tariff Act, therefore malafide intention cannot be […]
It can be seen that the electricity charges which is reimbursed on actual basis in terms of the contract is not includible in the gross value of service provided by the appellant to Gujarat Gas Company Limited.
NPT Papers Pvt Ltd Vs C.C. Mundra (CESTAT Ahmedabad) It is well settled law that even if the foreign suppliers are related to indian importers the transaction value cannot be rejected on the grounds that a transaction is between the related person when identical or similar goods were sold at the same price to unrelated […]
In present facts of the case, while dismissing appeal of the Revenue, the Hon’ble CESTAT observed that substantial benefit provided by Notifications can’t be denied on procedural lapse.
Jindal Texofab Ltd Vs C.C.E. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) As per the above report it can be seen that after proper verification some discrepancy was found for Rs 1, 50,250/- which was reversed by the appellant. As per the procedure the proper stock verification was conducted by the Superintendent thereafter the Adjudicating Authority seeking further verification of […]
