Search Results for "CESTAT"

Trending :

Search Results for "CESTAT"

30 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 30 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals in Terminal Excise Duty Refund Dispute Under Foreign Trade Policy. Export Oriented Units Not Entitled to Refund as Procurement from Domestic Tariff Area Units Was Ab Initio Exempt from Excise Duty Under Paragraphs 6.2(b) and 6.11(c)(ii) of Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-2014.

4 Jan 2022

The dispute involved appeals by Export Oriented Units (EOUs) challenging the refusal of refund claims for Terminal Excise Duty (TED) paid on excisable...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal of 100% EOU in Customs Duty Case for Unauthorized DTA Sales of Cut Flowers. Cut Flowers Held Non-Excisable, Duty Leviable on Inputs Under Notification No. 126/94-Cus as Amended, Extended Limitation Period Invoked for Wilful Suppression.

1 Sep 2020

The appeal arises from a dispute between M/s. L.R. Brothers Indo Flora Ltd., a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) engaged in floriculture, and the Commis...

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...

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 Customs Appeal on Valuation of Imported Goods Under Customs Act, 1962 — Design and Supervision Charges Not Addable to Transaction Value. The Court held that costs for post-importation activities like erection, commissioning, and performance guarantee tests are not includible in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 4 read with Rule 9(1)(e) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988.

27 Apr 2020

The appeal arose from a dispute between the Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata, and Steel Authority of India Ltd. (SAIL) regarding the valuation ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Customs Valuation Case — Sequential Application of Valuation Rules Mandatory. Rule 7 and Rule 9 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 Cannot Be Applied Without First Considering Rules 4 and 5 for Identical or Similar Goods.

22 Apr 2019

The case involves appeals by M/s. Diyas Mantra Lighting Private Limited and its directors against orders of the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Pre...

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...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Trader's Liability for Excise Duty on Job Work Fabrics Under Rule 12B of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The Court Held That the Trader Who Gets Fabrics Manufactured Through Job Workers Is Deemed Manufacturer and Liable for Duty, Not the Job Worker.

28 Feb 2019

The case involves appeals by Dinesh Textiles, a trader who got cotton fabrics and made-ups manufactured through job workers, against the order of the ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim in Central Excise Duty Case — Limitation Period Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the period of limitation of six months under Section 11B(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies to a buyer's refund claim even if the manufacturer paid duty under protest, as the rights of manufacturer and buyer are distinct.

20 Feb 2019

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

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Customs Appeals on Import of Multi-Function Devices — Redemption of Restricted Goods Permitted on Payment of Market Value. Import of used MFDs without authorisation under Foreign Trade Policy held redeemable under Section 125 Customs Act, 1962, as restricted items, not prohibited.

24 Jan 2019

The Supreme Court dismissed appeals by the Commissioner of Customs against the release of imported Multi-Function Devices (MFDs) by the respondents, M...

1 2 3

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