9911796707
| TMI General Search |
|
Advanced Search Options
Showing 21 to 40 of 777 Records Search Text: Gtc ltd |
| Search Results |
| Circulars (4) Case-Laws (763) Forum (2) Articles (7) News (1) |
|
2005 (8) TMI 715 - DELHI HIGH COURT The Court declined to refer the parties to arbitration, finding that the defendants had waived their right to arbitration by actively participating in civil litigation. The Court confirmed the interim order staying arbitration proceedings and extended the stay to other defendants, emphasizing that the defendants must pursue their claims in Civil Courts rather than through arbitration.
2017 (11) TMI 1408 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT The court upheld the Tribunal's decision, confirming that services such as Goods Transport Agency, outdoor catering, Clearing and Forwarding agents, cargo handling, rent-a-cab, insurance, auction, and club house services qualify as input services under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The Department's appeals were dismissed, and the rulings favored the assessee.
2017 (11) TMI 483 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT The Tribunal allowed CENVAT credit for various services including GTA, outdoor catering, insurance, rent-a-cab, auction, and club or association services as "Input Services" under the CENVAT Credit Rules. The decision was supported by multiple High Court judgments emphasizing that services integral to the business of manufacturing and delivering final products are eligible for credit. The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeals, resolving the issues in favor of the assessee based on the inclusive interpretation of "input service."
1998 (8) TMI 296 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI The tribunal set aside the Commissioner of Central Excise's order imposing duty, confiscation, and penalties on the appellants and related parties for alleged clandestine removal of cigarettes. The tribunal found insufficient evidence to prove clandestine manufacture and removal, granting the benefit of doubt to the appellants. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, and consequential relief was granted in accordance with the law.
2023 (5) TMI 634 - ITAT AHMEDABAD The Tribunal dismissed all appeals by the Revenue, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions to delete protective additions under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act and to treat both long-term and short-term capital gains as genuine. It emphasized the need for corroborative evidence and ruled that protective assessment does not apply when the source of funds has been declared and accepted.
2002 (4) TMI 63 - SC Order The Supreme Court of India ordered GTC Industries Ltd. to pay interest as per its 4-3-1998 order, despite the company being before the BIFR. GTC Industries Ltd. was granted 12 weeks to fulfill the payment.
2017 (8) TMI 897 - CESTAT MUMBAI The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, ruling that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked for outdoor catering services provided in the appellant's canteen. However, the matter of admissibility of credit for other outdoor catering services was remanded for further review as there was no segregation on record. The appellant's argument regarding denial of credit for service tax paid after 01/04/2011 was rejected due to lack of documentary evidence. The Tribunal clarified that previous decisions applied specifically to canteen services and not other outdoor catering services.
2012 (11) TMI 605 - Delhi High Court The appeals challenging CESTAT's decision holding GTC Industries Ltd. liable for activities of KCPL and JKCL were dismissed due to non-compliance with the Supreme Court's order to pre-deposit excise duty. The Court emphasized that ownership of goods is irrelevant for levy purposes and highlighted GTC Industries Ltd.'s control over KCPL and JKCL. Despite depositing the penalty, the principal sum of Rs.3.85 crores remained unpaid, leading to the dismissal of the appeals. The judgment settled the liability dispute and interpretation of CESTAT's findings on corporate veil piercing in favor of the Revenue.
2010 (10) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, ruling that the assessee is entitled to CENVAT Credit on outdoor catering services as they are integrally connected with the business of manufacturing cement. The court directed the Excise Authorities to verify the reversed CENVAT credit proportionate to the cost of food recovered from employees. The appeal was disposed of with no order as to costs.
2009 (11) TMI 7 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI The Department's appeals, challenging orders disallowing credit on specific services as input services for manufacturing activities, were rejected. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the respondent's appeals based on previous decisions, citing factual similarities with established legal precedents. The Tribunal upheld the original orders, emphasizing the importance of consistency in applying legal precedents and the need for parties to align their case facts with established legal principles for effective arguments. The decision highlights the role of previous tribunal rulings in shaping current interpretations of the law and the necessity for parties to stay informed about legal challenges to cited precedents.
2014 (3) TMI 983 - CESTAT NEW DELHI The Tribunal set aside the confirmation of duty demand against M/s. GTC Industries Ltd. and Kanpur Cigarettes Ltd., directing a reconsideration due to lack of conclusive findings on duty evasion responsibility. Emphasizing principles of natural justice, the Tribunal highlighted the need for proper document provision, consideration of cross-examination, and timely adjudication to avoid interest liabilities. Concerns were raised over delays in adjudication and document handling, leading to a remand for de novo adjudication within a specified timeframe, with strict compliance directives to the Commissioner and endorsement to the Chairman, Central Board of Excise and Customs.
2015 (10) TMI 121 - CESTAT NEW DELHI The Tribunal held that confirming duties against two companies jointly and severally was not in accordance with the law. It directed the adjudicating authority to determine the actual manufacturer to avoid joint imposition of penalties. Emphasizing compliance with directions in remand orders, the Tribunal stressed the importance of proper adjudication processes and clear findings on responsible parties to prevent unjust penalties. Addressing adjudication process delays and interest liabilities, the Tribunal urged expedited resolution to prevent further delays and accumulation of interest liabilities, emphasizing the need for timely adjudication.
2003 (2) TMI 253 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI The Tribunal rejected the appeals in a case involving duty evasion on clearances of Cut-Tobacco and packaging material by a manufacturing company. The appellants' arguments regarding incorrect information on Form XXV-A filled by drivers to evade duty were dismissed. The Tribunal upheld duty imposition, citing discrepancies in documentation and evasion attempts, ultimately finding no merit in the appellants' contentions.
2009 (4) TMI 349 - CESTAT, MUMBAI The Judicial Member set aside the lower authorities' decision disallowing CENVAT credit on outdoor catering services, remanding the case for fresh adjudication. The Member directed the original authority to consider a Larger Bench decision that deemed such services as part of the cost of production of excisable goods. The lack of specific details on the impact of catering services on production necessitated further examination, instructing the authority to verify relevant facts and allow the assessee a fair opportunity to present their case.
2009 (12) TMI 143 - CESTAT, MUMBAI The Tribunal allowed the appeals concerning the rejection of refund claims for service tax on input services used for manufacturing and exporting final products. It was held that services like rent-a-cab, outdoor catering, air travel booking, telephone/mobile services, and steamer agent services qualify as "input service" under rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, expanding the scope of eligible services for Cenvat credit. The appellants were granted the refund of service tax paid on these services as they were deemed related to business activities and manufacturing processes.
2001 (12) TMI 485 - CEGAT, MUMBAI The tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case to the jurisdictional Commissioner for a fresh decision. The Commissioner was directed to supply the appellants with copies of all relevant documents, afford the facility of inspection, and provide copies of other relied-upon documents. The Commissioner was also instructed to pass fresh orders after considering the appellants' reply and extending a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The appellants were granted the liberty to raise all pleas in their defense. The appeals were allowed by remand.
2005 (3) TMI 61 - ALLAHABAD High Court The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that the royalty payment made by the assessee was a revenue expenditure, deductible under section 37 of the Income-tax Act. The Court agreed that the payment was for a limited period, dependent on production quantity, and did not result in acquiring any capital assets. Therefore, the royalty payment was treated as a revenue expenditure, allowing it as a deduction for the relevant assessment year.
2015 (3) TMI 1043 - MADRAS HIGH COURT The High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal and affirmed the Tribunal's decision, allowing the first respondent to avail CENVAT credit on outdoor catering services as input services. The Court emphasized the broad interpretation of 'input service' to include services integral to the business of manufacturing. The decision was based on previous judgments and the Larger Bench decision in CCE, Mumbai v. GTC Industries Ltd. The Court directed the Excise Authorities to verify the proportionate credit reversed by the assessee, resolving the issue in favor of the assessee with no costs awarded.
2013 (1) TMI 503 - CESTAT BANGALORE The Tribunal upheld the denial of CENVAT credit on Outdoor Catering Service and Repair/Maintenance of Guest House for the disputed period, amounting to Rs. 88,123. The appellant's claim for CENVAT credit on outdoor catering service was rejected due to the lack of statutory obligation to maintain a canteen for workers during the dispute period. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of factual evidence to support claims related to the use of guest houses for business purposes. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the impugned order denying the credit was upheld.
2015 (10) TMI 1044 - Supreme Court The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in a case involving duty demands and penalties against M/s. GTC Industries Ltd. for alleged false declarations in claiming concessional central excise duty on cigarettes. The Tribunal disagreed with the Department's classification under Notification No. 11/83, finding the product correctly classifiable under a different sub-paragraph based on witness statements. It observed no direct link between the security deposit scheme and alleged extra collections, citing precedents and ultimately ruling in favor of the respondent due to the lack of merit in the Department's case.
|
