Sky Alloys & Power Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (CESTAT Delhi) The appellant M/s Sky Alloys & Power Pvt. Ltd. are engaged in manufacture of Sponge Iron, MS Ingots and Silico Manganese. Their premises were got searched on 7 November 2015 and 8 November 2015 by the team of Preventive Officers of Central Excise, Customs [&hell...

Baldeep Singh Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) In the present case inspite of opportunity given, Revenue failed to produce the proof of delivery of the show cause notice. Further, from perusal of the order-in-original, I find that the Adjudicating Authority have not recorded satisfaction of service of show cause notice and have p...

Sanjay Goel Vs Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) Apparently and admittedly, no search was conducted in premises of any of the present appellants. No physical verification of the stock of present appellants was conducted. Both the show cause notices, the initial order-in-original and the impugned order under chal...

Syncom Formulations (I) Ltd. Vs Commissioner (CESTAT Delhi) I find that admittedly, the appellant have used the disputed inputs for fabrication of clean room, which is essential for manufacture of their dutiable goods, as such clean room is  necessary for maintaining proper temperature and hygiene as well as keeping the RH factor in cont...

Rakesh Canteen Contractor Vs Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs & ServiceTax (CESTAT Delhi) The brief facts are that the appellant has been awarded canteen services contract from M/s Caparo Engineering India Limited, by way of running and managing their canteen located in their factory premises. The only issue involved in this appe...

Recon Steel & Power Private Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner, Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Since the sole challenge to the order is its reliance upon third party evidence, it is necessary to check the evidentiary value of the third party The relevant case law in the case of Bajrangbali Ingots & Steel [&he...

Vishnu Fragrance Pvt.Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Central Excise and Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Rule 10 of Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2010, provides for abatement in case of non production of goods (in case of factory did not pr...

Balkrishna Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) Service in question i.e. renting of immovable property is very well covered in ‘means’ as well as ‘includes’ clause of the definition of the input service as given under Rule 2 (I) of Cenvat Credit Rule, 2004. This Rule allows Cenvat Credit...

Sundaram Packaging India Pvt.Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs, CGST & Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) Scope of Rule 6 is still with respect to the inputs/inputs services used in or in relation to the manufacture of exempted goods along with manufacture of non-exempted goods. Hence, irrespective, exempted goods include non-excisable goods ...

Sikar Ex-Serviceman Welfare Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs Commissioner Central Excise and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The final submission of appellant is that once the penalty has been imposed upon an organisation, simultaneous imposition of penalty on the office bearers thereof, is not sustainable. We observe in view of the definition of ...