Search Results for "Customs and Central Excise Department"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Bombay High Court at Goa Dismisses Review Petition in Partition Suit Impleadment...
Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witn...

Search Results for "Customs and Central Excise Department"

540 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 540 result(s)

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Customs Department's Reference Application in Export Valuation Case. Tribunal's finding that facts were indistinguishable from precedent upheld, no question of law arises.

12 Dec 2025

The Principal Commissioner of Customs filed a Civil Petition under Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962, challenging the final order of the Central E...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes Distillery Licence Cancellation in Maharashtra Prohibition Act Case — Violation of Natural Justice as Show-Cause Notice Did Not Specify Grounds for Cancellation. The court held that cancellation of a distillery licence without proper notice and opportunity to be heard is unsustainable under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949.

28 Apr 2022

The petitioner, Shri Saikrupa Sugar & Allied Industries Ltd., a company running a sugar factory and distillery plant in Hiradgaon, challenged the orde...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal, Classifies Car Matting as Carpet Under Chapter 57 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. HSN Explanatory Notes and Specific Description Principle Applied to Hold That Car Matting Is More Specifically Described as Carpet Than as Motor Vehicle Accessory.

1 May 2020

The case involved two appeals by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III against a common decision of the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the buyer's refund claim is time-barred as it was filed beyond six months from the date of purchase, and the manufacturer's protest does not extend the limitation for the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B(1) Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) is distinct from the manufacturer's right, and the benefit of the second proviso (waiver of limitation for duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The Supreme Court dismissed a batch of appeals filed by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central exci...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Petitioner's Challenge to Show-Cause Notice Under Customs Act — No Interference at Pre-Adjudication Stage. Section 28(11) of Customs Act, 1962 Upheld as Valid and Compensatory in Nature.

30 Jan 2018

The petitioner, M/s. Royaloak Furniture India LLP, a furniture importer, filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India ...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Service Tax Case — Notification 8/2005-ST Held Conditional. CESTAT order setting aside demand against assessee upheld as notification required fulfillment of conditions for exemption.

1 Apr 2015

The Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-II, filed appeals under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, challenging a common order dated 12...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Rebate Claim of Dealer in Central Excise Case — Revenue's Revision Rejected for Ignoring Evidence. Dealer entitled to rebate under Rule 12(1)(a) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 35EE of Central Excise Act, 1944 when duty paid to manufacturer and not passed on to exporter.

10 Aug 2010

The Petitioners, M/s. Madhav Steel (a partnership firm) and its partner R.J. Virwadia, filed a writ petition challenging the Order dated 29th May 2006...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Customs Duty Exemption Case - Cess Under Textile Committees Act Not Part of CVD. Cess under Section 5 of Textile Committees Act, 1963 is not includable in Countervailing Duty under Section 3 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 for exemption purposes.

2 Mar 2010

The appellant, M/s. Shree Rajasthan Texchem Limited, a manufacturer of yarn, imported capital goods (textile machinery) under bills of entry dated 28t...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Customs Appeal in Rig Import Valuation Case — Upholds Reassessment Based on Higher Transaction Value. Customs Duty Demand on 'Pride Pennsylvania' Rig Upheld as Invoice Value Not Sole Determinant Under Customs Act, 1962.

24 Apr 2006

The Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai, appealed against the order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) which h...

11 12 13 14 15

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