9911796707
| TMI General Search |
|
Advanced Search Options
Showing 41 to 60 of 777 Records Search Text: Gtc ltd |
| Search Results |
| Circulars (4) Case-Laws (763) Forum (2) Articles (7) News (1) |
|
2015 (4) TMI 254 - MADRAS HIGH COURT The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision allowing the first respondent to avail CENVAT Credit for canteen services and outward freight, treating them as 'Input Services' related to the business of manufacturing final products. The Court emphasized the broad interpretation of 'input service' to include services integral to the manufacturing process. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's decision, with directions to verify the CENVAT credit proportionate to the cost of food borne by employees.
2015 (9) TMI 1317 - CESTAT NEW DELHI The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order confirming demand and imposing penalties jointly and severally on the appellants, remanding the case for a fresh decision. The Tribunal emphasized the need to determine each appellant's liability separately, aligning with established legal principles. Additionally, the confiscation of plants and machineries was ordered, highlighting the flaws in joint confirmation of demands and penalties. Procedural concerns such as non-supply of documents and the plea of cross-examination were addressed, ensuring a transparent decision-making process. The judgment aimed to rectify legal errors and promote fairness in determining liabilities.
2014 (3) TMI 142 - CESTAT BANGALORE The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT BANGALORE directed the appellant to pre-deposit a specific amount within a set timeframe as a condition for waiver and stay of remaining dues related to denied CENVAT credits for outdoor catering services. The appellant's plea of limitation based on Tribunal decisions was not accepted due to lack of evidence of periodic return filings. The Tribunal emphasized compliance with the pre-deposit requirement for granting waiver and stay, considering conflicting decisions and the appellant's claim for credit on the entire service tax amount.
2009 (8) TMI 399 - CESTAT, MUMBAI The stay petitions seeking waiver of duty amount and penalties were disposed of as the appeals against denial of Cenvat credit on Outdoor Caterer Services were considered. The appellants' case was found to align with a Larger Bench's decision, leading to the impugned order being set aside and the appeals allowed with consequential relief.
1988 (6) TMI 54 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA The appeal was dismissed, affirming the trial judge's orders. The court upheld the High Court's inherent power to punish for contempt and stressed the importance of fair procedures in contempt proceedings. It was held that the trial judge's actions did not infringe upon the principles of natural justice or the constitutional rights of the contemners.
2011 (9) TMI 631 - CESTAT, MUMBAI The Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the Revenue, denying the company's claim for CENVAT Credit on Service Tax paid for Outdoor Catering services. The Tribunal held that if the service tax is borne by the worker, the manufacturer cannot claim credit for that portion, emphasizing the importance of who bears the cost in determining eligibility for credit. The decision was based on a detailed analysis of conflicting legal precedents, ultimately concluding that the Gujarat High Court decision cited by the respondent did not align with the facts of the case.
2015 (8) TMI 158 - MADRAS HIGH COURT The court dismissed the appeal, confirming the Tribunal's order. It held that outdoor catering services provided in compliance with statutory requirements qualify as "input service." The cenvat credit of the service tax paid for such services is eligible for availment and utilization. The Tribunal's reliance on the Larger Bench decision in CCE, Mumbai vs. GTC Industries Limited was deemed appropriate. The issue was resolved in favor of the assessee, with no costs awarded.
Cestat Delhi order A user inquired about locating a CESTAT Delhi order related to an appeal involving GTC Industries. The discussion revealed that the order, dated 27.10.2010, addressed issues of undervaluation and MRP, and was confirmed by the Supreme Court on 27.08.2012. There was some confusion about the date or order number, which was clarified as Excise appeal no 5236 of 1992. The CESTAT order exonerated GTC from joint liability, imposing only a penalty. The Supreme Court upheld this decision in civil appeals 1466, 1468, and 1469 of 2011.
2015 (6) TMI 1091 - MADRAS HIGH COURT The Court upheld the eligibility of Cenvat credit on outdoor catering services and outward transportation of final products beyond the place of removal, following precedent and legislative intent. The appeal was dismissed in favor of the assessee, affirming the Tribunal's decision, with no costs.
2015 (3) TMI 632 - MADRAS HIGH COURT The Court upheld the admissibility of Cenvat credit for outdoor catering and rent-a-cab services, ruling in favor of the assessees. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's decision, while the assessees' appeals were allowed. The Court clarified that the retrospective application of Notification No.3 of 2011 was not applicable to the disputed period.
2009 (12) TMI 287 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI The Tribunal allowed the appeal, overturning the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, and deemed the impugned order unsustainable. It held that bill collection services qualified as an 'input service' under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal concluded that once Service tax was paid and credit taken based on invoices, the assessment could not be reopened, aligning with precedents from the Larger Bench and the Bombay HC.
2009 (9) TMI 287 - CESTAT, BANGALORE The Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the appellants, setting aside the disallowance of Cenvat credit on certain services based on established legal precedents and interpretations of the Cenvat Credit Rules.
2009 (3) TMI 147 - CESTAT, MUMBAI The appeal was allowed by way of remand for further examination. The Member (J) set aside the lower authorities' orders and directed the original authority to determine if the service tax paid on catering service formed part of the cost of production of the final product based on a specific formula. If so, the tax would be admissible as input service tax credit. Other related appeals with similar issues were also noted for appropriate proceedings.
2016 (11) TMI 989 - CESTAT MUMBAI The Tribunal upheld the Revenue's decision to disallow credit for service tax paid on "outdoor catering services" and "rent-a-cab service" due to lack of disclosure by the appellant regarding cost recovery from employees. The appeal was dismissed, and penalties were imposed based on interpretational issues related to Cenvat credit, as the appellant failed to inform the Revenue about the recovery, despite arguing against the penalty imposition.
2012 (10) TMI 624 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI The Tribunal directed the appellant, a filter manufacturer, to deposit 50% of the Cenvat credit demand within four weeks, with the remaining amount, interest, and penalty waived pending appeal disposal. The decision balanced worker efficiency, cost recovery, statutory requirements, and the classification of canteen services to determine Cenvat credit eligibility, pending further examination during the final hearing.
2009 (8) TMI 412 - CESTAT, BANGALORE The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a stay petition challenging the pre-deposit of demand, interest, and penalty amounting to Rs. 4,72,151 due to availing CENVAT Credit on specific services. Citing precedent cases, the Tribunal held that the appellant need not deposit any amount before the appeal hearing. The matter was remanded to the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) for reconsideration without requiring pre-deposit, emphasizing a decision based on merit. The stay petition and appeal were disposed of accordingly.
2009 (7) TMI 488 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, NEW DELHI ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the denial of Cenvat credit on various services like Rent-a-Cab, Courier, Air Travel Agent, Maintenance, Repair, and Telephone services. The Tribunal emphasized interpreting "input service" broadly in line with business requirements beyond manufacturing premises, allowing credit if the services were related to business activities. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering the service's connection to overall business operations for credit eligibility, following precedent cases like ABB Ltd. v. CCE & ST., Bangalore, and CCE, Mumbai-V v. GTC Industries Ltd.
2014 (12) TMI 74 - CESTAT MUMBAI The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the impugned order for recovery of the refund along with interest. The decision reinforced the principles of classification under TI 17(4), the requirement for restitution upon reversal of a judicial order, and the non-finality of interim orders pending a higher court's ruling.
2024 (2) TMI 79 - SC Order The SC dismissed the SLP due to non-compliance with the order dated 09.05.2017. All pending applications associated with the case were subsequently disposed of, concluding the proceedings.
2015 (11) TMI 846 - MADRAS HIGH COURT The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, determining that outdoor catering services availed by the appellant qualified as 'input services' under the CENVAT Credit Rules. The Tribunal's decision to disallow CENVAT credit for catering services was overturned, emphasizing that services mandated by law, such as outdoor catering under the Factories Act, are integrally connected with the business of manufacturing. The Court directed the Excise Authorities to verify the CENVAT credit reversed by the assessee for compliance.
|
