Search Results for "Central Excise Rules 2002"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Claimant in Motor Accident Case — Functional Di...
Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Forgery Case Due to Long Pendency and No Crim...
Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit — Concurrent Findi...
High Court of Bombay at Bombay Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Acc...

Search Results for "Central Excise Rules 2002"

215 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 215 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Cash Refund of CENVAT Credit Under Section 11B(2) Proviso (c) When Credit Cannot Be Utilized Due to Exempted Final Products. The court held that clause (c) to the proviso of section 11B(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 permits cash refund of credit on inputs where the assessee is unable to utilize such credit, overruling the contrary view in Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Jain Vanguard Polybutylene Ltd.

14 Jun 2019

The Full Bench of the Bombay High Court was constituted to resolve a conflict regarding the interpretation of clause (c) to the proviso of section 11B...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Excise Duty Exemption Case — NCCD, Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess Not Payable When Basic Excise Duty Exempted. Exemption Notification Under Section 5A of Central Excise Act, 1944 Covers NCCD as Duty of Excise, and Surcharges on Excise Duty Cannot Be Levied Without Substratum.

1 Mar 2019

The appeal arose from a dispute between Bajaj Auto Limited (appellant) and the Union of India (respondent) regarding the liability to pay National Cal...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions Challenging Central Excise Duty Demand on Scrap Generated During Car Manufacturing. Generation of scrap during manufacturing process is not a separate taxable event under Central Excise Act, 1944.

29 Sep 2014

The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by Premier Ltd. and New Holland Fiat (India) Pvt. Ltd. challenging show cause notices issued by the Cen...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Refund of Cess Paid Under Protest in Excise Matter — Unjust Enrichment Principle Not Applicable to Cess Under IDR Act. Section 11-B of Central Excise Act Held Inapplicable to Cess Collected Under Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, and Refund Directed with Interest.

26 Apr 2005

The petitioners, Shree Vidhya Paper Mills and Mr. Rameshwarlal Motilal, filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court seeking refund of Rs. 10,19,246...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Cenvat Credit Interest Dispute — Reversal Without Utilization Does Not Attract Interest. Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 interpreted to require actual utilization for interest liability.

25 Mar 2019

The appellant, Cipla Limited, a manufacturer of medicaments, was engaged in the manufacture of medicaments containing ethanol (alcohol) which fell out...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Manufacturer's Appeal in Rebate Claim Case Due to Limitation Under Section 11B of Central Excise Act. Rebate of duty on exports is governed by the limitation period prescribed under Section 11B, as 'refund' includes 'rebate' under Explanation (A) to that section.

29 Nov 2022

The appellant, Sansera Engineering Limited, a manufacturer of excisable goods, exported goods between August 2015 and October 2015 and filed claims fo...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Part — NCCD Payable Despite Excise Duty Exemption, Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess Not Payable. The Court held that Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess, being surcharges on excise duty, cannot be levied when basic excise duty is exempted, but NCCD, being an independent duty of excise, is payable.

1 Mar 2019

The appeal arose from a dispute between Bajaj Auto Limited (the appellant) and the Union of India regarding the liability to pay National Calamity Con...

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 façade cladding does not bring into existence a new product with distinct name, character, and use under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

27 May 2026

The appellant, is a construction contractor that imports Aluminum Composite Panels (ACPs) and undertakes cutting, grooving, and routing of these panel...

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...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds CESTAT's Remand Order in Central Excise Valuation Dispute — Evasion of Duty Based on Undervaluation of Plywood/Block Boards. The Court Held That the Adjudicating Authority Must Provide a Reasoned Order After Proper Cross-Examination and Consideration of Evidence, and That the Tribunal's Remand for De Novo Adjudication Was Justified.

19 Aug 2020

The case involves appeals by the Commissioner of Central Excise against orders of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) that...

1 2 3 4

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