Search Results for "CESTAT order"

Trending :

Search Results for "CESTAT order"

319 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 319 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Assessee's Appeal in Central Excise Case: Cutting and Grooving of Aluminum Composite Panels Does Not Amount to Manufacture. Process of cutting, grooving, and routing ACPs for facade cladding does not bring into existence a new product with distinct name, character, or use under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

27 May 2026

The appellant, M/s Alupuro Building Systems Pvt. Ltd., is a construction contractor that imports pre-coated Aluminum Composite Panels (ACPs) and under...

High Court

Madras High Court Allows Writ Petitions Seeking Compliance with BIFR Rehabilitation Scheme and Quashes Pre-deposit Order in Customs Dispute. Merger of Sick Company with Petitioner Under SICA Extinguishes Pre-deposit Liability, and Revenue Authorities Are Bound by the BIFR Scheme.

7 Jan 2026

The petitioner, SMS Lifesciences India Limited, filed two writ petitions. The first sought a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 (Director G...

High Court

Validation of DRI Officers' Jurisdiction. Establishing the authority of DRI officers as proper officers under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.

26 Nov 2024

The Bombay High Court disposed of the writ petition filed by Idea Cellular Ltd., challenging the jurisdiction of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Customs Appeal Upholding CESTAT Order Expunging Policy Condition for Provisional Release of Imported Vehicle. Policy condition requiring testing by VRDE/ARAI held redundant when vehicle is already registered under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

14 Aug 2024

The case involves an appeal by the Commissioner of Customs against an order of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) which al...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Department's Appeal in Central Excise Refund Case — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Is Mandatory and Unjust Enrichment Applies to Pre-deposit Refunds. The court held that the one-year limitation for refund claims cannot be extended and the claimant must prove no passing of duty burden.

8 Mar 2024

The case involves two connected matters: an appeal by the Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Thane Rural, against an order of the Customs, Excise ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue Appeal in Central Excise Clandestine Removal Case — CESTAT Order Upheld for Lack of Evidence. Allegation of removal of 1,687,585.511 kg of yarn without duty payment fails as Revenue could not prove clandestine removal beyond reasonable doubt.

8 Sep 2022

The Principal Commissioner of Central GST & C. Ex., Daman Commissionerate, filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, against ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Manufacturer in Central Excise Valuation Dispute — Voluntary Charitable Donation (Dharmada) Not Part of Transaction Value Under Section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944. Court Holds That Only Consideration for Sale of Goods or Additional Consideration in Connection with Sale Can Be Included; Voluntary Payment for Charity Falls Outside Scope.

9 Apr 2019

The appellant-assessee, M/s D.J. Malpani, manufactured goods falling under Chapter 24 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. While selling goods, the appell...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Central Excise Case — Cenvat Credit on Capital Goods Allowed Even if Used for Exempted Goods Prior to Common Use. The court held that the restriction under Rule 3(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 does not apply when capital goods are used for both exempted and dutiable goods, and the assessee is entitled to credit if the goods are used in the manufacture of final products.

20 Jun 2018

The case involves appeals filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bengaluru, under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, against orders of...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Assessee's Appeal in Gutkha Excise Duty Case for Lack of Substantial Question of Law. The court held that the CESTAT's findings on valuation and penalty were factual and not perverse, and no question of law arose under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

14 Jun 2018

The case involves appeals filed by M/s. Trishul Arecanut Granuels Private Limited and its Director, H.S. Nataraj, against the Commissioner of Central ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Sets Aside CESTAT Order for Lack of Reasons in Central Excise Refund Case — Remands to Tribunal for Fresh Adjudication. The Tribunal failed to record reasons while reversing the Commissioner's order, violating principles of natural justice under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

24 Aug 2010

The Commissioner of Central Excise filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the order dated 21st September 2004 passe...

9 10 11 12 13

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)