CESTAT Chandigarh held that in view of the wider scope given in the definition under Section 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, cenvat credit of all the Input Services used in or in relation to the manufacture and sale of final products or in relation to the business activity cannot be denied.
In the case of Gurjant Singh Beant Singh vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, CESTAT Chandigarh clarifies service tax threshold calculation and classification issues.
CESTAT Chandigarh quashes denial of Cenvat Credit on input, input services, capital goods for Tower Vision India Pvt Ltd. Analysis of the ruling.
CESTAT Chandigarh rules on penalty in CCE-Jammu Vs. Khyber Industries (P) Ltd. Detailed analysis of mens rea requirement under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules.
Explore CESTAT Chandigarh order allowing Cenvat Credit for Sari Guard and Mirror Assembly in case of Hero Motorcorp Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise.
CESTAT Chandigarh held that the registration of the premises is not a pre-condition for availment of cenvat credit and thereof consequently the refund.
Analyzing the landmark CESTAT Chandigarh case where Ludhiana Steel Rolling Mills successfully appealed against a Central Excise demand for Rs. 82,20,602. Find out why the Court sided with the appellant.
Analysis of CESTAT Chandigarh’s ruling in S. R. Medical Agencies vs. Commissioner of Central Excise regarding service tax on BSNL commission. Learn about the implications.
Analyze the CESTAT Chandigarh order in M R Beltings vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, focusing on the issue of willful suppression and its impact on excise duty demand.
Exploring the key details of the GKN Driveline (India) Ltd vs CCE case at CESTAT Chandigarh, and its impact on the reversal of Cenvat Credit under Rule 3(5B).
