SUPREME COURT RULING (CENTRAL EXCISE)

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "SUPREME COURT RULING (CENTRAL EXCISE)"

Transcription

1 SUPREME COURT RULING (CENTRAL EXCISE) 2015-TIOL-256-SC-CX CCE Vs Amrit Food (Dated: September 3, 2015) Central Excise - Classification - milk shake mix and soft serve mix: The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has classified these products under Chapter sub-heading accepting the contention of the assessee in this behalf. However, the Revenue wants to have the same covered under Chapter sub- Heading TIOL-255-SC-CX Andaman Timber Industries Vs CCE (Dated: September 2, 2015) Central Excise - Adjudication - Cross Examination - not allowing the assessee to crossexamine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity inasmuch as it amounted to violation of principles of natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. The order of the Commissioner was based upon the statements given by the two witnesses. Even when the assessee disputed the correctness of the statements and wanted to crossexamine, the Adjudicating Authority did not grant this opportunity to the assessee. It would be pertinent to note that in the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority he has specifically mentioned that such an opportunity was sought by the assessee. However, no such opportunity was granted and the aforesaid plea is not even dealt with by the Adjudicating Authority. As far as the Tribunal is concerned, rejection of this plea is totally untenable. The Tribunal has simply stated that crossexamination of the said dealers could not have brought out any material which would not be in possession of the appellant themselves to explain as to why their ex-factory prices remain static. It was not for the Tribunal to have guess work as to for what purposes the appellant wanted to cross-examine those dealers and what extraction the appellant wanted from them TIOL-254-SC-CX CCE Vs Angadpal Indl Pvt Ltd (Dated: October 6, 2015) Central Excise - Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, The vires of the Rule was challenged before the Madras High Court in Beauty Dyers v. Union of India TIOL-190-HC-MAD-CX and the High Court held the said Rule to be ultravires the erstwhile Section 3A of the Act. Special leave petition was preferred by the Union of India against the said judgment was dismissed by this Court. The judgment is reported by the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. Entex Pvt. Ltd TIOL-2123-HC-MAD- CX TIOL-253-SC-CX CC & CE Vs 20 Microns Ltd (Dated: September 8, 2015) Central Excise - Classification - "Calcined China Clay": The question that arises for consideration in the instant appeal relates to the classification of the product

2 manufactured by the respondent-assessee which is known as " Calcined China Clay". According to the Revenue, it needs to be classified under Chapter sub-heading to the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, whereas the assessee maintains that the appropriate classification is under Chapter Heading Show Cause Notice proceeded on the basis that as China Clay was calcined, it could not be included under Chapter Heading and since Chapter Heading mentions about some specified product including those consisting of mixture of natural products, it would fall under Chapter Heading Held: merely because the product of assessee, i.e., China Clay is calcined, it would not put it out of Chapter Heading TIOL-251-SC-CX CCE Vs Raymond Ltd (Dated: October 1, 2015) Central Excise - Classification - Remand - The only objection raised by the Revenue is that when the issue was remitted back for re-determination it should have been open remand and should not have remarked that "Dry Weight Standards" should be applied and even in respect of that the matter should have been left open for the Adjudicating Authority to take a call thereof. This suggestion is accepted by the counsel for the assessee. The directions are modified with the observations that on remand when the matter is to be re -determined by the Adjudicating Authority, it is an open remand and it would be permissible for the Adjudicating Authority to go into all the relevant issues in determining the classification TIOL-248-SC-CX CCE Vs Hitkari Fibres Ltd (Dated : September 3, 2015) Central Excise - Valuation - additional consideration - It is not in doubt that the time when the goods were cleared, the price which was charged from M/s. Maruti and the duty was paid on the said price. No doubt, some additional amount is received thereafter, on account of price escalation. However, it is not coming on record as to under what circumstances such price escalation was given. No such case was set up by the Revenue that the price was understated or depressed at the time of clearance of the goods and the additional amount was received subsequently, by a suspicious kind of arrangement. In the absence of any such facts, it is difficult to hold that the aforesaid additional amount received at a subsequent stage was to be added for the purpose of arriving at the transaction value TIOL-247-SC-CX CCE Vs Honda Siel Power Products Ltd (Dated: September 3, 2015) Central Excise - Condition of exemption notification that duty has to be paid in cash/pla not fulfilled - Benefit of exemption denied : One of the conditions of the exemption notification was that the duty had to be paid in cash or through account current. However, the assessee cleared the goods through utilization of CENVAT Credit which is not the prescribed mode mentioned as per the condition. It is an admitted case that duty was neither paid in cash nor through account current as the duty was paid through CENVAT Credit Account and therefore the assessee did not fulfill the second condition mentioned in the notification. Exemption Notification - Benefit of doubt should be in favour of Department : It is

3 trite that exemption notifications are to be construed strictly and even if there is any doubt same is to be given in favour of the Department. Tribunal has decided the case in favour of the assessee by observing that clearing of goods with payment of excise duty with current account was only an error and the assessee had not violated the more substantial condition viz no CENVAT Credit should be taken in regard to the goods. This is clearly a faulty approach on the part of the Tribunal. The assessee was required to fulfill the condition in stricto senso viz to pay the duty either in cash or through account current if it wanted to avail the benefit of exemption notification and not through adjustment of CENVAT Credit which is not the mode prescribed in the aforesaid conditions. Once we find that the conditions have not been fulfilled the obvious consequence would be that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit of this notification TIOL-246-SC-CX CCE Vs I G Petrochemical Ltd (Dated: September 1, 2015) Central Excise - EOUs - Exemption for Goods manufactured with indigenous raw materials - Catalysts are not raw materials : The assessee is a 100% Export Oriented Unit(EOU) which is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods viz., Phthalic Anhydride, Waste Water, Waste Steam and Low Boiling Component. If the goods are produce d or manufactured only from the raw material produced or manufactured in India, the assessee would be entitled to the concessional rate of duty as prescribed in the Notifications. Thus, in order to avail the benefit of these Notifications it was required to establish by the assessee that it was producing the aforesaid goods from the raw material produced or manufactured in India. On this aspect dispute has arisen inasmuch as while producing the aforesaid products the assessee was also using Vanadium Pentoxide which was imported by the assessee. As per the Revenue, Vanadium Pentoxide which is the material used for the manufacture of the products in question is the raw material and since the aforesaid components of raw material are imported, the assessee would not be entitled to the benefit of the aforesaid notifications. The assessee on the other hand submitted that Vanadium Pentoxide was only a catalyst. The Order-in-Original was passed holding that the assessee were not eligible to avail the benefit of the said Notifications. However, the Tribunal, in appeal, reversed the order with its finding that it is not the raw material. Since the term 'raw material has not been defined anywhere except in the EXIM Policy, as far as the Commissioner is concerned, he had adopted the definition therefrom. However, as per the Tribunal, the said definition contained in the EXIM Policy would be of no relevance. It is not in dispute that Vanadium Pentoxide, while influencing and accelerating the chemical reactions, itself remains uninfluenced and unaltered and retains its independent character. It is also not in dispute that it remains outside the product and does not form part of the product. This has been accepted even by the Commissioner and finding to this effect is given by stating that it is not directly consumed in the process of manufacturing and normal life of the catalyst is 36 months, after which this catalyst has to be replaced by a new one. Tribunal is right in its approach because under EXIM Policy catalyst is covered as capital goods inasmuch as the Supreme Court in various judgments on the subject has taken the view that the raw material is not a defined term. On that basis, it is held that the meaning to the expression 'raw material' has to be given in the ordinary well accepted connotation in common parlance of those who deal with the matter. Held: the catalyst could not be treated as raw material. No violation with the approach of the Tribunal in granting the benefit of the aforesaid Notifications to the assessee herein.

4 2015-TIOL-245-SC-CX CCE Vs R D C Concrete (India) Ltd (Dated: September 8, 2015) Central Excise - appeals - a total mindless exercise on the part of the Revenue in filing such an appeal which is misuse and abuse of the process of law - Appeal by Revenue even after classification confirmed by Supreme Court in favour of assessee - After the affirmation of the view of the CESTAT by the Supreme Court, the Department not only accepted the view but Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi, issued Circular No. 601/38/2001-CX dated affirming the classification of this product. what was the necessity in preferring the present appeal which was filed in the year 2006, i.e., much after the clarification issued by the even the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi? It was, thus, a total mindless exercise on the part of the Revenue in filing such an appeal which is misuse and abuse of the process of law TIOL-244-SC-CX Caprihans India Ltd Vs CCE (Dated: September 9, 2015) Central Excise - Classification - Limitation : The appellant-assessee is engaged in printing of PVC films/ sheets at its factory located in Daman. The appellant has classified its goods under Chapter Heading 4901 of the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, and were clearing the goods by paying the excise duty payable for the items covered by the said Heading. Show Cause Notice dated was issued by the Department asking the appellant to show cause as to why the aforesaid goods manufactured by the assessee be not classified under Chapter Heading The appellant contested the same. The plea of the appellant was accepted and orders dated were passed thereby dropping the proposed move in the Show Cause Notice and allowing the a ppellant to clear the goods with classification under Chapter Heading The goods in this manner were thereafter cleared from 1994 till 1999 when another Show Cause Notice dated was issued for the period to stating that during this period goods were wrongly cleared under Chapter Heading 4901 and instead appropriate classification was On that basis, differential duty was demanded and interest and penalty were also proposed, which were confirmed. Held: the present appeal warrants to be allowed only on the ground that the impugned show cause notice was time barred and it was not a case where the Revenue could invoke the provisions of proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act and take benefit of the extended period of limitation. The Department had issued Show Cause Notice way back on asking the appellant to reclassify the goods under Chapter Heading Therefore, all relevant facts were within the knowledge/ notice of the Department. Not only this, after the appellant had filed the reply to the said Show Cause Notice and was heard in the matter, the proposed move in the said Show Cause Notice was even dropped. Therefore, by no stretch of imagination, the appellant can be treated as a person who had misled the authorities or made any mis-statement / mis -declaration. The appeal is allowed on this ground itself without going into the issue of classification setting aside the impugned order. As a result, the impugned orders passed by the authorities below are set aside TIOL-242-SC-CX Headway Lithographic Company Vs CCE (Dated: April 7, 2015) CX - Simple printing is done on the wrappers which are cut to size for the purpose of wrapping the biris - printing of biri wrappers would not and can never fit under the

5 description 'transfer decalcomanias' - goods in question would fall under Item no which attracts nil duty - in view of the aforesaid classification, it is not even necessary to go into the question whether the process amounts to manufacture or not Since the appeal is still pending before the Tribunal where the issue of classification is pending, and as that issue has been decided in the present order, the Tribunal will dispose of the appeal in terms of the judgment rendered giving consequential benefits of refund of duty/deposits, if any - Appeal allowed: Supreme Court [para 10, 11] Also see analysis of the order 2015-TIOL-240-SC-CX UoI Vs M/s DSCL Sugar Ltd (Dated: July 24, 2015) CX Bagasse emerging as residue/waste of sugarcane - Deeming fiction introduced by insertion of Explanation to section 2(d) of the CEA, 1944 by the Finance Act, before the aforesaid fiction is to be applied, it is necessary that the process should fall within the definition of "manufacture" as contained in Section 2(f) of the Act - it could not be pointed out by Revenue as to whether any process in respect of Bagasse has been specified either in the Section or in the Chapter note - In the absence thereof, the deeming provision u/s 2(f)(ii) of CEA, 1944 cannot be attracted - Otherwise, it is not in dispute that Bagasse is only an agricultural waste and residue, which itself is not the result of any process - Therefore, it cannot be treated as falling within the definition of Section 2(f) of the Act and in the absence of manufacture, there cannot be any excise duty - Since it is not a manufacture, obviously Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, shall have no application as rightly held by the High Court Appeals dismissed: Supreme Court Cenvat Credit in respect of electricity was denied only on the premise that Bagasse attracts excise duty and consequently Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules is applicable - Since this action of the appellant is found to be erroneous, all these appeals of the Revenue also stand dismissed: Supreme Court 2015-TIOL-239-SC-CX M/s Spentex Industries Ltd Vs CCE (Dated: October 9, 2015) Central Excise - Rebate - Both inputs and final products are entitled for rebate - "OR" means "AND" : Rule 18 stipulates that the Central Gove rnment may, by notification, grant rebate of duty paid on such excisable goods OR duty paid on material used in the manufacturing or processing of such goods. The word 'OR' which is used in between the two kinds of duties in respect of which rebate can be granted is the bone of contention and it is to be interpreted whether it postulates grant of one of the two duties or both the duties can be claimed. Once this scheme is kept in mind, it cannot be the intention of the Legislature to provide rebate only on one item in case a particular exporter/manufacturer opts for other alternative under Rule 18, namely, paying the duty in the first instance and then claiming the rebate. Giving such restrictive meaning to Rule 18 would not only be anomalous but would lead to absurdity as well. In fact, it would defeat the very purpose of grant of remission from payment of excise duty in respect of the goods which are exported out of India. It may also lead to invidious discrimination and arbitrary results. Interpretation of word 'OR' occurring in Rule 18: The only inevitable consequence is this : the word 'OR' occurring in Rule 18 cannot be given literal interpretation as that leads to various disastrous results and, therefore, this word has to be read as 'and' as that is what was intended by the rule maker in the scheme of things and to carry out the objectives of the Rule 18 and also to bring it at par with Rule 19.

6 Also see analysis of the order 2015-TIOL-238-SC-CX CC & CE Vs M/s Ispat Industries Ltd (Dated: October 7, 2015) Central Excise - Valuation - whether, by virtue of a transit insurance policy in the name of the manufacturer, excise duty is liable to be recovered on freight charges incurred for transportation of goods from the factory gate to the buyer's premises, treating the buyer's premises as the place of removal. No : in the present case all prices were "ex-works", like the facts in Escorts JCB's case. Goods were cleared from the factory on payment of the appropriate sales tax by the assessee itself, thereby indica ting that it had sold the goods manufactured by it at the factory gate. Sales were made against Letters of Credit and bank discounting facilities, sometimes in advance. Invoices were prepared only at the factory directly in the name of the customer in which the name of the Insurance Company as well as the number of the transit Insurance Policy were mentioned. Above all, excise invoices were prepared at the time of the goods leaving the factory in the name and address of the customers of the respondent. When the goods were handed over to the transporter, the respondent had no right to the disposal of the goods nor did it reserve such rights inasmuch as title had already passed to its customer. Also see analysis of the order 2015-TIOL-236-SC-CX M/s Larsen & Toubro Ltd Vs CCE (Dated: October 6, 2015) Central Excise - Exemption - 'Ready Mix Concrete' (RMC) vs Concrete Mix (CM) - They are two different products. it is the process of mixing the concrete that differentiates between CM and RMC. In the instant case, as it is found, the assessee installed two batching plants and one stone crusher at site in their cement plant to produce RMC. The batching plants were of fully automatic version. Concrete mix obtained from these batching plants was delivered into a transit mixer mounted on a self propelled chassis for delivery at the site of construction is in a plastic condition requiring no further treatment before being placed in the position in which it is to set and harden. Notification No. 4 dated March 01, 1997 exempts only 'Concrete Mix' and not 'Ready Made Mixed Concrete' and RMC is not the same as CM. Held : the assessee was producing RMC and the exemption notification exempts only CM and the two products are different. Even if there is a doubt, which was e ven accepted by the assessee, since we are dealing with the exemption notification it has to be strict interpretation and in case of doubt, benefit has to be given to the Revenue TIOL-235-SC-CX CCE Vs M/s Fitrite Packers (Dated: October 7, 2015) CX - Manufacture - s.2(f) of CEA, Blank paper could be used as wrapper for any kind of product, however, after the printing of logo and name of the specific product of Parle thereupon, the end use was now confined to only that particular and specific product of the said particular company/customer - printing, therefore, is not merely a value addition but has now been transformed from general wrapping paper to special wrapping paper - End use has positively been changed as a result of printing process undertaken by the assessee - printing has resulted into a product, i.e., paper with distinct character and use of its own which it did not bear earlier -

7 activity amounts to manufacture and CE duty payable under Revenue appeal allowed: Supreme Court [para 9, 10, 12, 13] Also see analysis of the order

SUPREME COURT RULING (CENTRAL EXCISE)

SUPREME COURT RULING (CENTRAL EXCISE) SUPREME COURT RULING (CENTRAL EXCISE) 2015-TIOL-284-SC-CX CCE Vs M/s Virat Crane Industries Ltd (Dated: November 6, 2015) Central Excise - Branded Chewing Tobacco - Not relevant whether the brand is own

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2016 VERSUS J U D G M E N T

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2016 VERSUS J U D G M E N T 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11261 OF 2016 COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE SERVICE TAX...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ULTRA TECH CEMENT LTD....RESPONDENT(S)

More information

Credit allowed on capital goods use to manufacture exempted intermediate product as duty was paid on final product

Credit allowed on capital goods use to manufacture exempted intermediate product as duty was paid on final product Credit allowed on capital goods use to manufacture exempted intermediate product as duty was paid on final product Cenvat Credit : Cenvat credit cannot be denied on capital goods used in manufacture of

More information

Click to Close. Click to Print. Case Tracker. Passed by the. Date COMMISSIONER MUMBAI-II. Airline

Click to Close. Click to Print. Case Tracker. Passed by the. Date COMMISSIONER MUMBAI-II. Airline Click to Print Click to Close 2017-TIOL-3894-CESTAT-MUM IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH, MUMBAI Case Tracker DHL LOGISTICS PVT LTD Vs CCE [CESTAT] Appeal No.

More information

Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Trivandrum

Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Trivandrum [2016] 92 VST 291 (Ker) [IN THE KERALA HIGH COURT] HF Department. Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Trivandrum THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN AND MRS. ANU SIVARAMAN JJ. February 05,2016

More information

INDIRECT TAX UPDATES RSA Legal Solutions 11 th August 2017

INDIRECT TAX UPDATES RSA Legal Solutions 11 th August 2017 INDIRECT TAX UPDATES RSA Legal Solutions 11 th August 2017 About RSA Legal Solutions RSA Legal Solutions is an Indian Law firm specialized in the area of Indirect taxation i.e. Goods and Services Tax,

More information

2015-TIOL-1036-CESTAT-MUM IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH, MUMBAI COURT NO.I

2015-TIOL-1036-CESTAT-MUM IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH, MUMBAI COURT NO.I 2015-TIOL-1036-CESTAT-MUM IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH, MUMBAI COURT NO.I Appeal No.ST/85482/14 & ST/86082/14 Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. PUN-EXCUS-003-APP-316-13-14

More information

2011-TIOL-443-HC-MAD-CUS IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS. C.M.A.No.3727 of 2004, W.P of 2011 and W.P of 1998 and CMP.No.

2011-TIOL-443-HC-MAD-CUS IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS. C.M.A.No.3727 of 2004, W.P of 2011 and W.P of 1998 and CMP.No. 2011-TIOL-443-HC-MAD-CUS IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS C.M.A.No.3727 of 2004, W.P.21054 of 2011 and W.P.12403 of 1998 and CMP.No.20013 of 2004 VETCARE ORGANIC PVT LTD Vs CESTAT, CHENNAI COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATER. Judgment delivered on: ITA 243/2008. versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATER. Judgment delivered on: ITA 243/2008. versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATER Judgment delivered on: 26.11.2008 ITA 243/2008 SUBODH KUMAR BHARGAVA... Appellant versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX... Respondent Advocates

More information

Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Punjab Chemical & Crop Protection Ltd

Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Punjab Chemical & Crop Protection Ltd Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Punjab Chemical & Crop Protection Ltd Judgement: 1. Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. - This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944 CEAC 2/2012 DATE OF DECISION : FEBRUARY 01, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944 CEAC 2/2012 DATE OF DECISION : FEBRUARY 01, 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944 CEAC 2/2012 DATE OF DECISION : FEBRUARY 01, 2012 SRI SAI ENTERPRISES & ANR. Through Mr. R. Krishnan, Advocate.... Petitioners

More information

Respondent preferred an appeal there against before the Commissioner (Appeals), which by an order dated was allowed. Appellant preferred an

Respondent preferred an appeal there against before the Commissioner (Appeals), which by an order dated was allowed. Appellant preferred an IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Civil Appeal No. 5901 of 2006 Decided On: 03.03.2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida Vs. Accurate Meters Ltd. Hon'ble Judges: S.B. Sinha, Asok Kumar Ganguly and R.M.

More information

[2016] 68 taxmann.com 41 (Mumbai - CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH. Commissioner of Service Tax. Vs. Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd.

[2016] 68 taxmann.com 41 (Mumbai - CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH. Commissioner of Service Tax. Vs. Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd. [2016] 68 taxmann.com 41 (Mumbai - CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH Commissioner of Service Tax Vs. Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd.* M.V. RAVINDRAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ORDER NO. A/85873/16/SMB AND OTHERS FEBRUARY

More information

INDIRECT TAXES Central Excise and Customs Case Law Update

INDIRECT TAXES Central Excise and Customs Case Law Update CA. Hasmukh Kamdar INDIRECT TAXES Central Excise and Customs Case Law Update Valuation Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai vs. Fiat India Pvt. Ltd. [2012 (283) ELT 161 (S.C.) decided on 29-8-12] Facts

More information

[2016] CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH

[2016] CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH [2016] 67 taxmann.com 251 (Mumbai - CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH Nirlon Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai* M.V. RAVINDRAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND C.J. MATHEW, TECHNICAL MEMBER ORDER NOS. A/85680-85681/2016/STB

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.683 OF 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.683 OF 2006 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.683 OF 2006 1) The Commissioner of Central Excise, Central Excise Building, Telangkhedi Road, Civil Lines, Nagpur. 2)

More information

Staying Updated Customs, FTP and WTO newsletter

Staying Updated Customs, FTP and WTO newsletter Staying Updated, FTP and WTO newsletter December 2013: Volume 16 Issue 9 News The Central Government is in the process of designing a mechanism for importers to easily pass on cenvat credit of CVD to a

More information

JOB WORK UNDER CENTRAL EXCISE

JOB WORK UNDER CENTRAL EXCISE JOB WORK UNDER CENTRAL EXCISE By Madhukar N Hiregange (FCA, DISA) & Prateek M (B.Com, ACA) Job work is one of the important aspects that a manufacturer registered under Central Excise should be familiar

More information

2015 (1) TMI CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (1) TMI CESTAT NEW DELHI 2015 (1) TMI 1093 - CESTAT NEW DELHI Other Citation: 2014 (36) S.T.R. 815 (Tri. - Del.) MOSER BAER INDIA LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NOIDA Denial of CENVAT Credit - Transfer of credit -

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE PRESENT. THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE AND. STRP Nos OF 2013*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE PRESENT. THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE AND. STRP Nos OF 2013* 1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF JULY, 2014 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE B. MANOHAR STRP Nos.774-794 OF 2013* BETWEEN: M/S

More information

PKMG LAW CHAMBERS ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS LAW REPORT ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS. ADVISER ADVISER

PKMG LAW CHAMBERS ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS LAW REPORT ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS.   ADVISER ADVISER PKMG LAW CHAMBERS LAW CHAMBERS ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS LAW REPORT ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS www.pkmgcorporatelaws.com ADVISER ADVISER Mr. Pradeep K. Mittal B.Com., LL.B., FCS, Mr. PRADEEP Advocate K. MITTAL

More information

Constructions Contracts Practical Issues Multiplicity of Taxes. Year Presented By

Constructions Contracts Practical Issues Multiplicity of Taxes. Year Presented By Constructions Contracts Practical Issues Multiplicity of Taxes Year 2009 Presented By J.K. MITTAL (Advocate) Co-Chairman, Indirect Taxes Committee, ASSOCHAM & PHDCCI LL.B.,F.C.A., F.C.S. NEW DELHI Ph:

More information

VERENDRA KALRA & CO CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS INDIRECT TAX REVIEW JULY 2016 EXCISE CUSTOMS SERVICE TAX VALUE ADDED TAX. Inside this edition

VERENDRA KALRA & CO CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS INDIRECT TAX REVIEW JULY 2016 EXCISE CUSTOMS SERVICE TAX VALUE ADDED TAX. Inside this edition VERENDRA KALRA & CO CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS EXCISE Like always, Like never before CUSTOMS INDIRECT TAX REVIEW JULY 2016 Inside this edition SERVICE TAX VALUE ADDED TAX Changes in Excise Duty on Articles

More information

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on: CEAR No. 5/2001 UOI & ORS...

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on: CEAR No. 5/2001 UOI & ORS... THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 Judgment reserved on: 05.07.2011 Judgment delivered on: 12.07.2011 CEAR No. 5/2001 M/s PURE DRINKS LTD.... APPELLANT Vs UOI

More information

Staying Updated Customs, FTP and WTO newsletter

Staying Updated Customs, FTP and WTO newsletter Staying Updated, FTP and WTO newsletter January 2015: Volume 17 Issue 10 In the issue In the issue Notifications and circulars The Central Government has extended the benefit of exemption from filing of

More information

M/S. COAL HANDLERS PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLKATA

M/S. COAL HANDLERS PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLKATA M/S. COAL HANDLERS PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLKATA REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7215 OF 2004 M/S. COAL HANDLERS PRIVATE LIMITED...APPELLANT(S)

More information

JUNE 18INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT PATRON ADVISER ADVISER

JUNE 18INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT PATRON ADVISER ADVISER JUNE 18INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT PATRON SH.V.K.AGARWAL Formerly Member-Customs, Excise &ServiceTax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi Mobile No. 9818903406 E-mail:agrawalnagrawal@yahoo.co.in SH. L.P.ASTHANA Formerly

More information

2009 NTN (Vol. 41) - 89 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Hon'ble Mr. S.H. Kapadia & Hon'ble Mr. Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ. Civil Appeal No.

2009 NTN (Vol. 41) - 89 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Hon'ble Mr. S.H. Kapadia & Hon'ble Mr. Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 2009 NTN (Vol. 41) - 89 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Hon'ble Mr. S.H. Kapadia & Hon'ble Mr. Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 2765 of 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.1471/2008) M/s. Varkisons

More information

GENERAL PROCEDURES UNDER CENTRAL EXCISE

GENERAL PROCEDURES UNDER CENTRAL EXCISE 5 GENERAL PROCEDURES UNDER CENTRAL EXCISE SIGNIFICANT NOTIFICATIONS/CIRCULARS ISSUED BETWEEN 01.05.2014 AND 30.04.2015 1. Following amendments have been made in Central Excise Rules, 2002 [CER] vide Notification

More information

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: versus

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: versus THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 02.06.2010 + WP(C) 3899/2010 GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD... Petitioner versus UOI AND ORS... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case:- For

More information

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. ()

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. () (2010) 322 ITR 0158 :(2010) 032 (I) ITCL 0600 :(2010) 230 CTR 0320 :(2010) 036 DTR 0449 CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. () INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 --Penalty under section 271(1)(c)--Inaccurate particulars

More information

Income from business as computed in the assessment order

Income from business as computed in the assessment order SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, CJ. AND V.D. TULZAPURKAR, J. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 785 AND 783 OF 1977 APRIL 11, 1978 S.T.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : CORAM. THE Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY. W.P.No.1226 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : CORAM. THE Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY. W.P.No.1226 of 2016 1 RESERVED ON: 16.02.2016 DELIVERED ON: 19.02.2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 19.02.2016 CORAM THE Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY W.P.No.1226 of 2016 M/s Raghav Industries Ltd.,

More information

C. B. MOR CELLULAR COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR

C. B. MOR CELLULAR COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR [2015] 85 VST 58 (CESTAT) [CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL] (MUMBAI BENCH) C. B. MOR CELLULAR V. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR RAMESH NAIR Judicial Member January 16, 2015 HF

More information

CENVAT CREDIT Recent Court Rulings Presented by: Ca. Jayesh Gogri

CENVAT CREDIT Recent Court Rulings Presented by: Ca. Jayesh Gogri CENVAT CREDIT Recent Court Rulings Presented by: Ca. Jayesh Gogri 7/2/13 CA JAYESH Organised GOGRI by: 1 Wrong availment of CENVAT Credit and interest thereon Mr. Inamdaar was engaged in the manufacture

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BETWEEN : DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR STA No.112/2009 M/S

More information

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 747 of 2013 ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V...Appellant(s) Versus POLESTAR INDUSTRIES...Opponent(s)

More information

Union Budget CA. Ashok Batra. (The author is a member of the Institute. He can be reached at )

Union Budget CA. Ashok Batra. (The author is a member of the Institute. He can be reached at ) 1449 Changes in the Finance Act, 1994 And Rules [Except Mega Exemption Notification, Negative List Changes And Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 Changes] One of the striking features of the Finance Bill, 2015

More information

with ITA No.66/2011 % Decision Delivered On: JANUARY 20, VERSUS ORIENT CERAMICS & INDS. LTD. VERSUS

with ITA No.66/2011 % Decision Delivered On: JANUARY 20, VERSUS ORIENT CERAMICS & INDS. LTD. VERSUS * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No.65 of 2011 with ITA No.66/2011 % Decision Delivered On: JANUARY 20, 2011. 1) ITA No.65 of 2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX... Appellant through : Mr. Anupam

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 5818/2013. versus THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE. With + W.P.(C) 7788/2013 & CM 16560/2013

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 5818/2013. versus THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE. With + W.P.(C) 7788/2013 & CM 16560/2013 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 12-18. + W.P.(C) 5818/2013 HYOSUNG CORPORATION... Petitioner Through: Mr.Deepak Chopra, Mr. Amit Srivastava and Ms. Manasvini Bajpai, Advocates. versus THE

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Advocate. Versus

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Advocate. Versus $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 1990/2010 PREM KUMAR Judgment delivered on:08 th February, 2016 Represented by: Advocate. Versus... Petitioner Mr. Yogesh Verma, CUSTOMS... Respondent

More information

CAPTIVATING CAPTIVE CONSUMPTION

CAPTIVATING CAPTIVE CONSUMPTION CAPTIVATING CAPTIVE CONSUMPTION (S. Jaikumar, G. Natarajan & M. Karthikeyan) We have received an interesting poser, which is the feedstock of this article. The query goes, as to whether the pallets, racks,

More information

JUDGMENT. (Hon'ble Dalveer Bhandari, J.)

JUDGMENT. (Hon'ble Dalveer Bhandari, J.) 2008 NTN (Vol. 37) - 1 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Hon'ble Ashok Bhan & Hon'ble Dalveer Bhandari, JJ. Appeal (civil) 6636 of 2002 WITH Civil Appeal No.3270 of 2008 arising out of SLP (C) No.13762 of

More information

Summary of Notifications, Circulars from 16 th June, 2016 to 15 th July, 2016

Summary of Notifications, Circulars from 16 th June, 2016 to 15 th July, 2016 Summary of Notifications, Circulars from 16 th June, 2016 to 15 th July, 2016 SERVICE TAX 1. Services Provided prior to 31st May 2016 exempt from Krishi Kalyan Cess (KKC) The Central Government vide Notification

More information

COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX. MONSANTO MANUFACTURER PVT. LTD. and vice versa)

COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX. MONSANTO MANUFACTURER PVT. LTD. and vice versa) [2014] 71 VST 269 (All) [IN THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX V. MONSANTO MANUFACTURER PVT. LTD. and vice versa) DR. DHANANJAYA YESHWANT CHANDRACHUD C.J. March

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA 607/2015. versus AND ITA 608/2015. versus

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA 607/2015. versus AND ITA 608/2015. versus $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 12. + ITA 607/2015 PR. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX... Appellant Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Senior Standing counsel with Mr. Raghvendra Singh and Mr.Shikhar Garg,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4358 OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) NO. 25006 OF 2012) Commissioner of Income Tax-VI.Appellant(s)

More information

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHE A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHE A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHE A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s Malpani Estates, S.No.150, Malpani House, Indira Gandhi Marg,

More information

Staying Updated Indirect tax newsletter

Staying Updated Indirect tax newsletter Staying Updated Indirect tax newsletter August 2018, Volume 21 Issue 05 Case Laws Central Excise Tribunal sets aside order confirming demand of duty on alleged clandestine removal of goods without observance

More information

2011 NTN (Vol. 45)-75 [PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] Hon'ble Adarsh Kumar Goel. Hon'ble Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. VAT Appeal No. 54 of 2010 (O&M) M/s

2011 NTN (Vol. 45)-75 [PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] Hon'ble Adarsh Kumar Goel. Hon'ble Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. VAT Appeal No. 54 of 2010 (O&M) M/s 2011 NTN (Vol. 45)-75 [PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] Hon'ble Adarsh Kumar Goel. Hon'ble Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. VAT Appeal No. 54 of 2010 (O&M) M/s Nokia India Pvt. Ltd., Appellant. vs. State of Punjab

More information

Nandganj Sihori Sugar Co. Ltd. C. C. E., Lucknow Bajpur Co-operative Sugar Factory Ltd. C. C. E., Meerut II

Nandganj Sihori Sugar Co. Ltd. C. C. E., Lucknow Bajpur Co-operative Sugar Factory Ltd. C. C. E., Meerut II [2015] 79 VST 330 (CESTAT) [CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL] (NEW DELHI BENCH) Nandganj Sihori Sugar Co. Ltd. V. C. C. E., Lucknow Bajpur Co-operative Sugar Factory Ltd. V. C. C. E.,

More information

What is Manufacture under Excise?

What is Manufacture under Excise? What is Manufacture under Excise? Manufacture - Sec. 2(f) Process - Incidental/ ancilliary for the completion of main product Land Mark Case - UOI V. DCM Any process amounting to manufacture as specified

More information

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.91 of 2017

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.91 of 2017 NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.91 of 2017 (arising out of Order dated 04.05.2017 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, in C.P.

More information

1. Inclusion of cases filed with Settlement Commission in the "Call-Book"

1. Inclusion of cases filed with Settlement Commission in the Call-Book Summary of Notifications, Circulars from 16 th December2014 to 15 th January 2015 EXCISE 1. Inclusion of cases filed with Settlement Commission in the "Call-Book" CBEC vide Circular No. 992/16/2014-CX.,

More information

CHANGES IN THE CENTRAL EXCISE AND CENVAT CREDIT RULES

CHANGES IN THE CENTRAL EXCISE AND CENVAT CREDIT RULES Telephone 2433 00 66 Email Fax 2433 62 85 Cexchen2@vsnl.com Cexchni@md3.vsnl.net.in Cex2.cnn@gnmds.global.net.in GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE CHENNAI

More information

Legal Update INDIRECT TAXES

Legal Update INDIRECT TAXES 1774 Legal Update entitled to a specified percentage of the distributor s sales revenue less operating costs/expenses of the distributor. However, ITAT noted that since the assessee had no revenue left

More information

REFUND UNDER SERVICE TAX

REFUND UNDER SERVICE TAX REFUND UNDER SERVICE TAX (with special reference to Recent Developments) ORGANISED by WIRC OF ICAI CA. NARENDRA SONI 1 Summary of Refund under Service Tax Law Provisions Section 11B of The CE Act, 1944

More information

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5566 OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO of 2006 Union of India

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5566 OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO of 2006 Union of India SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5566 OF 2008 @ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 12357 of 2006 Union of India and another...appellants Vs. SPS Vains (Retd.) and others.respondents

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR C.S.T.A. NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR C.S.T.A. NO. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2015 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR BETWEEN C.S.T.A. NO.4/2015 THE

More information

20 th A U G U S T 2018

20 th A U G U S T 2018 20 th A U G U S T 2018 This alert summaries the following writ petitions & AAR filed and outcome of such petitions The key issues raised before the courts and Authority for Advance Ruling are: Failure

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: 20 th January, 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: 20 th January, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 20 th January, 2010 + ITA 239/2008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX... Appellant Through: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal versus GOETZE (INDIA) LTD. Through:...

More information

Availment of Credit based on computer generated invoice: Pre and Post Budget

Availment of Credit based on computer generated invoice: Pre and Post Budget Availment of Credit based on computer generated invoice: Pre and Post Budget 2015-16 -By CA Ashish Chaudhary Availment of credit based on unsigned invoice or printed signature on computers generated invoice

More information

In The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal

In The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad In The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Appeal No.ST/13975/2013-SM Arising out of OIA No.SRP/139/DMN/2013-14, dt.29.07.2013 passed by Commissioner of Central

More information

Applicability of CST/ VAT on E-Commerce Transactions:

Applicability of CST/ VAT on E-Commerce Transactions: Applicability of CST/ VAT on E-Commerce Transactions: The business model of e-com firms is they provide a platform for enabling sellers of goods to be able to sell without boundaries of location across

More information

SARLA PERFORMANCE FIBERS LTD. ETC. Vs. C.C.E., SURAT-II. Dated - June 03, 2016

SARLA PERFORMANCE FIBERS LTD. ETC. Vs. C.C.E., SURAT-II. Dated - June 03, 2016 SARLA PERFORMANCE FIBERS LTD. ETC. Vs. C.C.E., SURAT-II. Dated - June 03, 2016 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3555-3560 OF 2012 Sarla Performance

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE B. MANOHAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE B. MANOHAR 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 18 th DAY OF JUNE 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE B. MANOHAR STRP NO.18/2010 & STRP.NOS.106-125/2010

More information

F. No. 137/85/2007-CX. 4 Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs New Delhi

F. No. 137/85/2007-CX. 4 Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs New Delhi Cirlcular No. 97/8/2007 F. No. 137/85/2007-CX. 4 Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs New Delhi Procedural issues in Service Tax-circular-reg.

More information

EY Tax Alert. Executive summary

EY Tax Alert. Executive summary 16 March 2016 EY Tax Alert CESTAT allows credit of Service tax on transportation, treating the place where property in goods is transferred in terms of Sale of Goods Act - as Place of removal Executive

More information

Bharat Raichandani Advocate

Bharat Raichandani Advocate Bharat Raichandani Advocate Section 14 of CEA, 1944 - Power to summon persons to give evidence and produce documents in inquiries under this Act Section 73 of FA, 1994 - Recovery of service tax not levied

More information

2011 NTN 46)-10 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]

2011 NTN 46)-10 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 2011 NTN (Vol. 46)-10 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, & Anil R. Dave, JJ. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3186 OF 2011 [Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 560 of 2011] Commissioner

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CUSAA 4/2013. Versus

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CUSAA 4/2013. Versus $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 16. + CUSAA 4/2013 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS... Appellant Through Mr Rahul Kaushik, Senior Standing Counsel. Versus ORION ENTERPRISES... Respondent Through Mr

More information

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: ITA 232/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: ITA 232/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 21.05.2014 + ITA 232/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI... Appellant versus WORLDWIDE TOWNSHIP PROJECTS LTD... Respondent Advocates who appeared

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR BETWEEN: STA No.36/2010 3M INDIA

More information

Summons, Investigation, Audit, Special Audit, Show cause Notice, Appeals. Bharat Raichandani Advocate

Summons, Investigation, Audit, Special Audit, Show cause Notice, Appeals. Bharat Raichandani Advocate Summons, Investigation, Audit, Special Audit, Show cause Notice, Appeals Bharat Raichandani Advocate Section 14 of CEA, 1944 - Power to summon persons to give evidence and produce documents in inquiries

More information

PKMG LAW CHAMBERS. ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT ADVISER. Mr. Pradeep K. Mittal. B.Com., LL.B.

PKMG LAW CHAMBERS. ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT   ADVISER. Mr. Pradeep K. Mittal. B.Com., LL.B. PKMG LAW CHAMBERS LAW CHAMBERS ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS INDIRECT TAX LAW REPORT www.pkmgcorporatelaws.com ADVISER Mr. Pradeep K. Mittal B.Com., LL.B., FCS, Advocate Central Council Member The Institute

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 14 + ITA 557/2015. versus CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R %

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 14 + ITA 557/2015. versus CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R % $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 14 + ITA 557/2015 COPERION IDEAL PRIVATE LIMITED... Appellant Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor and Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

More information

FINAL November INDIRECT TAXATION Test Code 67 Branch (MULTIPLE) (Date : ) All questions are compulsory.

FINAL November INDIRECT TAXATION Test Code 67 Branch (MULTIPLE) (Date : ) All questions are compulsory. FINAL November 2017 INDIRECT TAXATION Test Code 67 Branch (MULTIPLE) (Date : 10.09.2017) (50 Marks) Note: All questions are compulsory. Answer 1(6 Marks) Status Holders are business leaders who have excelled

More information

the income was received from letting out of the properties, it was in the nature of rental income. He, thus, held that it would be treated as income f

the income was received from letting out of the properties, it was in the nature of rental income. He, thus, held that it would be treated as income f 'REPORTABLE' IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4494 OF 2004 M/S CHENNAI PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS LTD., CHENNAI... Appellant VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 12 th DAY OF JUNE 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR STRP 120/2013 & STRPs.229-250/2013 c/w STRP

More information

EMS Technologies Pvt Ltd Vs CC & CE (Dated: September 28, 2016)

EMS Technologies Pvt Ltd Vs CC & CE (Dated: September 28, 2016) CESTAT RULING 2016-TIOL-2686-CESTAT-MUM Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd Vs CC (Dated: March 15, 2016) Cus - Appellant imported "Datacolour Autolab 32, Laboratory Dispenser and Solution Maker" and claimed classification

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: INCOME TAX MATTER. Judgment delivered on : ITR Nos. 159 to 161 /1988

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: INCOME TAX MATTER. Judgment delivered on : ITR Nos. 159 to 161 /1988 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: INCOME TAX MATTER Judgment delivered on : 09.07.2008 ITR Nos. 159 to 161 /1988 M/S DELHI INTER EXPORTS PVT LTD... Appellant versus THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

More information

REFUND AND REBATE - A service tax perspective

REFUND AND REBATE - A service tax perspective REFUND AND REBATE - A service tax perspective By: Mr. Dakshina Murthy Assisted by Mr. A Sai Prasad Advocates CONSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS Article 265 -No tax shall be levied or collected except by authority

More information

2 said issue of non-granting of interest on the refund due to the appellant, in the present appeal. 2. This appeal came up for preliminary hearing bef

2 said issue of non-granting of interest on the refund due to the appellant, in the present appeal. 2. This appeal came up for preliminary hearing bef - In the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal at Ahmedabad Before: Hon'ble Mr. Justice, KA.Puj, President Shri Y.P.Bhatt, Member Shri N.A.Acharya, Member SECOND APPEAL NO. 895 OF 2013 MIS. JUPITER ENGINEERS

More information

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI IV... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate VERSUS

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI IV... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate VERSUS IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT ITA NO.1192/2011 Reserved on : 8th November, 2011. Date of Decision : 21st November, 2011. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI IV... Appellant

More information

[2014] CESTAT) CESTAT, NEW DELHI BENCH

[2014] CESTAT) CESTAT, NEW DELHI BENCH Service Tax : Contention that 'assessee was not service-provider but was service-recipient' is not 'a piece of evidence', it is a 'pleading, a ground of appeal' and goes to root of jurisdiction; hence,

More information

Rule 8 (3A) of CE Rules, 2002 Is it all pervasive? (G. Natarajan, Advocate, Swamy associates)

Rule 8 (3A) of CE Rules, 2002 Is it all pervasive? (G. Natarajan, Advocate, Swamy associates) Rule 8 (3A) of CE Rules, 2002 Is it all pervasive? (G. Natarajan, Advocate, Swamy associates) The decision of the Hon ble Tribunal in the case of Godrej Harshey Vs CCE (Citation) is sure to send shockwaves

More information

Staying Updated Customs, FTP and WTO newsletter

Staying Updated Customs, FTP and WTO newsletter Staying Updated, FTP and WTO newsletter November 2014: Volume 17 Issue 08 In the issue In the issue All India Rates (AIR) of Duty Drawback have been revised effective from 22 November, 2014 Valuation Royalty

More information

Rate of service tax restored to 12% As per section 66, rate of service tax is 12% of the value of taxable services. However, in February 2009, the

Rate of service tax restored to 12% As per section 66, rate of service tax is 12% of the value of taxable services. However, in February 2009, the Rate of service tax restored to 12% As per section 66, rate of service tax is 12% of the value of taxable services. However, in February 2009, the rate of service tax was reduced to 10% vide Notification

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Central Excise Act, 1944 DECIDED ON: CEAC 22/2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Central Excise Act, 1944 DECIDED ON: CEAC 22/2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Central Excise Act, 1944 DECIDED ON: 23.07.2012 CEAC 22/2012 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT)... Petitioner Through: Dr.Ashwani Bhardwaj, Advocate versus

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.4380 OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.4380 OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4380 OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 24888 OF 2015) Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax... Appellant(s)

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2016 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO OF 2015) VERSUS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2016 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO OF 2015) VERSUS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12274 OF 2016 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO. 22059 OF 2015) REPORTABLE GOPAL AND SONS (HUF) CIT KOLKATA-XI VERSUS...APPELLANT(S)...RESPONDENT(S)

More information

Advanced Tax Laws and Practice

Advanced Tax Laws and Practice Advanced Tax Laws and Practice Roll No : 1 : 376 Time allowed : 3 hours Maximum marks : 100 Total number of questions : 8 Total number of printed pages : 8 NOTE : All the references to sections mentioned

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO BETWEEN : AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR CRP No.332/2010 STATE

More information

Staying Updated Customs, FTP and WTO newsletter

Staying Updated Customs, FTP and WTO newsletter Staying Updated, FTP and WTO newsletter November 2015: Volume 18 Issue 08 In the issue In the issue The Central Government has notified Village Tumb, Taluka Umbergaon, District Valsad in State of Gujarat

More information

PAPER 8 : INDIRECT TAX LAWS Answer all questions. PART A. units

PAPER 8 : INDIRECT TAX LAWS Answer all questions. PART A. units Question 1 (a) (b) (c) PAPER 8 : INDIRECT TAX LAWS Answer all questions. PART A Compute the assessable value and amount of excise duty payable under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and rules made thereunder

More information

CERTIFICATE COURSE ON INDIRECT TAXES

CERTIFICATE COURSE ON INDIRECT TAXES THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA Indirect Taxes Committee CERTIFICATE COURSE ON INDIRECT TAXES SUGGESTED ANSWERS OF THE ASSESSMENT TEST HELD ON 25 TH AUGUST, 2012 PART A Write the correct

More information

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras. Date : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Sudhakar and The Honble Ms. Justice K.B.K.

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras. Date : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Sudhakar and The Honble Ms. Justice K.B.K. In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Date : 14.07.2015 The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Sudhakar and The Honble Ms. Justice K.B.K. Vasuki T.C.A. No: 398 of 2007 M/s. Anusha Investments Ltd. 8 Haddows Road

More information

CENVAT CREDIT. Join with us https://www.facebook.com/groups/caultimates/ SIGNIFICANT NOTIFICATIONS/CIRCULARS ISSUED BETWEEN TO

CENVAT CREDIT. Join with us https://www.facebook.com/groups/caultimates/ SIGNIFICANT NOTIFICATIONS/CIRCULARS ISSUED BETWEEN TO 7 CENVAT CREDIT SIGNIFICANT NOTIFICATIONS/CIRCULARS ISSUED BETWEEN 01.05.2014 TO 30.04.2015 1. Following amendments have been made in CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 [CCR] vide Notification No. 6/2015 CE (NT)

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER Reserved on: 21st February, 2012 Pronounced on: 2nd July, 2012 MAC.APP.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER Reserved on: 21st February, 2012 Pronounced on: 2nd July, 2012 MAC.APP. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER Reserved on: 21st February, 2012 Pronounced on: 2nd July, 2012 MAC.APP. 10/2008 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.... Appellant Through: Mr.Pradeep

More information

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA 5. In this backdrop, it is important here to note the relevant provisions made for ITC under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017( the CGST Act ) which states that every registered person shall

More information