Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited Vs Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit (CESTAT Delhi) It is a fact that out of the total amount of CENVAT credit of Rs. 4,99,32,736/- that has been disallowed claiming it to be for purchase of towers falling under Chapter 73. However, an amount of Rs. 4,90,91,607/- consisted […]
D.S. Cargo Agency Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) No doubt, there is no document on record as provided by the Department, burden to prove otherwise rests upon the Department but it is settled principle of law that the appellants admission are the best proof which need no further proof. Hence, the burden need not […]
Wijeta Impex And Logistics Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT DELHI ORDER The order of Commissioner (Appeals) bearing No. 191-193/2017 dated 24 May, 2019 has been assailed vide the impugned appeal. 2. I have heard Shri S. Sunil, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant and Shri Yasbir Singh, learned Authorised […]
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 control, and […]
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 […]
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 produce the notified goods […]
KEC International Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & CGST (CESTAT New Delhi) amount as was prayed to be refunded is admittedly an amount other than the duty or interest which is the subject matter of refund under Section 11 B. Keeping in view the same, to my opinion Section 11B should not have been […]
It was held that when an Institute run by a State Government and associated in implementation of various welfare schemes of the Government, the allegations of suppression of facts or wilful misstatement can be nothing but absurd.
Shree Mohangarh Construction Co. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT New Delhi) The first contract is supply of river sand; it is not for loading or unloading any cargo. Needless to say that if somebody has to supply river sand it has to loaded into the truck and unloaded it at the […]
Evershine Customs (C & F) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs a) The penalty under section 112 on the Customs Broker is set aside because even if the allegation that the CB has not fulfilled his obligations under CBLR 2013 is proven, no penalty can be imposed on this ground under section 112 of the […]
