CESTAT Mumbai held that penalty under rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 can be levied only if it is found that the concerned person have dealt with the goods in any manner which they knew are liable to confiscation. Role of co-noticee proved and hence penalty justifiable.
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Thermax Ltd. (CESTAT Mumbai) On perusal of the records, it is seen that the respondent had procured duty paid inputs on which CENVAT credit was availed but cleared the goods, as such, on a sale value which was higher than the purchase CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 provide for clearance of […]
CESTAT observed that the products in question would be classifiable under CTH 85177090 and not CTH 85176290 based on HSN and the Departmental Circular could not run contrary to the Judicial Pronouncements.
Commissioner of Customs Vs Pidilite Industries Ltd (CESTAT Mumbai) It is seen that the first appellate authority has interpreted the time limit in section 27A of Customs Act, 1962 according to the letter of the law which mandates liability of interest for any delay in sanction of refund beyond three months from date of claim. […]
Siba International Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Mumbai) Facts of the case, in a nutshell, is that Appellant-Exporter Siba International was engaged in export of processed buffalo meat after procuring the same from M/s. Al-Azlan Frozen Foods, Moradabad (UP) an approved processing plant for export of boneless buffalo meat as a prescribed condition under Chapter […]
Kellogg India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CGST & CE (CESTAT Mumbai) Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of breakfast cereals and avails the CENVAT credit of excise duty paid on inputs and capital goods and service tax paid on input services used in relation to the manufacture of their final products. From the perusal […]
Desai and Diwanji Vs Commissioner of CGST (CESTAT Mumbai) It was held in that decision that in the event of centralised billing and centralised accounting system, when one registration is permissible under Section 4(2), discharging Service Tax liability from the registered premises would not disentitled the benefits of CENVAT Credit on the Service Tax paid […]
As appellant had not taken registration and had not filed ST-3 returns within the prescribed time, penalty imposed under Section 77 was justified.
Manikgarh Cement Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) As could be noticed from para 24 of the Order-in-Original, the adjudicating authority had observed that Welding Electrodes and D.A. Gas were used in the cement manufacturing plant of the Appellant for the purpose of repair and maintenance of its plant and machinery. This being observation […]
CESTAT Mumbai held that used mild steel (MS) plates industrial significance only as waste and scrap which is the feedstock for melting in furnaces and hence classifiable as waste and scrap.
