Excise Duty : In the case of M/s. Holostick India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise , Hon'ble Supreme Court held that While classifying a...
Excise Duty : Shabina Abraham & Ors. Vs. CCEC (Supreme Court of India) The legal heirs submitted that a reading of Sections 2(f), (3), Section 4...
Excise Duty : In the case of Commissioner Of Central Excise, Hyderabad Vs. M/S Sarvotham Care Limited, it was held that wherein the shampoo havi...
Custom Duty : In the case of Commissioner of Customs vs. M/s. Seiko Brushware India , it was held by Supreme Court that benefit of exemption Not...
Excise Duty : In the case of M/s. Rupa & Co. Limited Vs. The Commissioner of Central Excise, it was held that what is contained in finished prod...
Custom Duty : In the case of M/S. Jaswal Neco Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Customs , it was held by Supreme Court that anti-dumping duty could not b...
The appellant deals in the manufacture and sale of cement. According to the appellant, in the present case, sale of cement was made at the destination of the buyer and hence the appellant would be entitled to CENVAT credit on input service on transportation of the cement sold by the appellant.
In the case of Srikant Bagla Vs. Commissioner of Customs & Ors., it was held that an assessee cannot be benefitted when it is proved that the assessee had a substantial contribution to make towards the delay in the legal proceedings.
The appellant availed CENVAT credit on input and capital goods. On a visit of the Central Excise officers, Preventive Unit, Thane – I on 20/02/2007, on their insurance, the appellant have reversed CENVAT credit of Rs.1, 70,737/- on 12/03/2007.
