Search Results for "CESTAT appeal"

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...
Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Incredible Dying Declaration...
Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Under Section 182 IPC for Lack of Val...

Search Results for "CESTAT appeal"

330 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 330 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Central Excise Case on Unjust Enrichment. Bar of Unjust Enrichment Not Applicable to Provisional Assessment Cases Prior to Amendment of Rule 9B of Central Excise Rules, 1944.

3 May 2018

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III Commissionerate, against the judgment of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Ap...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Revenue's Appeal in Central Excise Case on Section 11D Demand for Ethanol Blended Petrol. The court held that CESTAT erred in setting aside demand under Section 11D of Central Excise Act, 1944 merely because duty was not separately shown in invoice, as duty was collected as part of composite price.

18 Jul 2023

The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Belapur Commissionerate appealed against an order of CESTAT, Mumbai dated 31 August 2020, which allowed the...

High Court

Bombay High Court Adjudicates Central Excise Appeal on Service Tax Liability for Veterinary and Testing Services. Assessee Claims Exemption Under Notification No. 13/2003-ST for Commission Agent Services, While Revenue Alleges Taxable Business Auxiliary Services.

28 Aug 2023

The appeal was filed before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay under Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 35G of the Central Exci...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Customs Classification Dispute — Extended Limitation Period Not Invokable Without Evidence of Suppression. CESTAT's finding that there was no misdeclaration or suppression of facts by the importer upheld, and the demand for differential duty beyond normal period was barred by limitation under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.

21 Sep 2022

The Principal Commissioner of Customs (Import) filed an appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 against an order of the Customs Excise and S...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Central Excise Penalty Case — CESTAT Order Upheld. Penalty under Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules, 1944 set aside for lack of evidence of aiding and abetting.

21 Sep 2010

The case involves two appeals filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai, against the orders of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Revenue Appeal in CENVAT Credit Case — Works Contract Service Classification Upheld. CENVAT Credit on Input Services for Works Contract Held Inadmissible Under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

2 May 2023

The present appeal arises from a judgment of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) at Allahabad dated 09.11.2017, which allo...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Revenue's Appeal in Central Excise Penalty Case — Show-Cause Notice for Penalty Under Section 11AC Not Barred by Section 11A(2B) Despite Pre-Notice Duty Payment. CESTAT Erred in Holding That Payment of Duty Before Show-Cause Notice Precludes Issuance of Notice for Penalty.

9 Feb 2011

The case involves an appeal by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs against an order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Central Excise Penalty Case — No Substantial Question of Law Arises. Tribunal's finding that penalty under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 is not automatic and requires mens rea upheld.

21 Jun 2010

The Commissioner of Central Excise filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the order dated 29th October 2009 passed ...

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...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Allows CENVAT Credit on GTA Service for Cement Manufacturer — Place of Removal Includes Buyer's Destination. Interpretation of 'Place of Removal' under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 for outward transportation of goods sold on FOR destination basis.

2 Jul 2015

The appellant, M/s. Madras Cements Limited, a manufacturer of cement, filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the fi...

3 4 5 6 7

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