Excise Duty : T. T. Recycling Management India Private Limited (hereinafter also referred to as applicant) is a resident Private Limited Company...
Excise Duty : It is engaged in the manufacture and sale of PET Chips. The applicant now intends to start a new business whereby the applicant i...
Excise Duty : Nucleus Device is classifiable under Tariff Entry 85176290 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985 as Machines...
Excise Duty : The High Court has dismissed the Writ Petition by the impugned judgment and order dated 2.9.2011. Being dissatisfied with the dism...
Excise Duty : In the instant case, the applicant has submitted that the tag is applied by them while placing the jewellery in the box to preven...
T. T. Recycling Management India Private Limited (hereinafter also referred to as applicant) is a resident Private Limited Company. Applicant proposes to source different grades of steel scrap from the generating factories and approved vendors within India as well as outside India. The scrap so procured in such a variety of forms and grades is neither suitable for the foundries nor suitable for steel mills as a raw material for its manufacturing activity.
It is engaged in the manufacture and sale of PET Chips. The applicant now intends to start a new business whereby the applicant intends to import coal from outside India of various size and all that It intends to do is to crush the same and thereafter supply it to the customers as per their demand.
Nucleus Device is classifiable under Tariff Entry 85176290 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985 as Machines for the reception conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice images or other data including switching and routing apparatus other.
The High Court has dismissed the Writ Petition by the impugned judgment and order dated 2.9.2011. Being dissatisfied with the dismissal of his writ petition the appellant preferred a Review Petition which was also dismissed by the High Court by the impugned judgment and order dated 24.11.2011.
In the instant case, the applicant has submitted that the tag is applied by them while placing the jewellery in the box to prevent return of counterfeit items. Application does not mention that applicant would affix or emboss brand name on the jewellery. Tagging in this case is not embossing or affixing. Therefore, the activity of tagging of jewellery would not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) ibid.
Applicant is an entity incorporated for undertaking wholesale operations in India. The applicant will enter into vendor procurement contracts to purchase products from the manufacturers hold inventory on its own account and sell the same to retailers industrial users or other wholesalers.
In the case of M/s Quality Fabricators and Erectors Vs. The Deputy Director, DGCEI, Zonal Unit Mumbai and Others, it was held that in case of non payment of service tax by the assessee, the notices for recovery cannot be issued to assessee’s debtors unless the liability has been crystallised.
It was held that in case of erstwhile in terms of Rule 57AB(1C) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 3(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001, it was held that in terms of circular dated 1.7.2002 by which, where no sale is involved but only a transfer by one sister unit to another, the value shown in the invoice on the basis of which Cenvat credit was taken by the assessee would be the value for the purpose of Rule 57AB and Rule 3(4).
It is held that although contract, undoubtedly, designates the consideration in Indian rupees so that the service provider is not put to loss on account of currency fluctuations and merely because Service provider designates the consideration in Indian rupees, his Service Tax Exemption on Exports cannot be denied,
They were availing Cenvat credit of education cess paid on the inputs used by them in the manufacture of tractors. The tractors manufactured by the appellants are exempted from payment of excise duty vide Notification No. 23/2004-CE dated 09/07/2004.
