9911796707
| TMI General Search |
|
Advanced Search Options
Showing 81 to 100 of 5784 Records Search Text: Ex kanpur |
| Search Results |
| Acts / Rules (17) Articles (34) Case-Laws (5515) Circulars (53) Forum (11) Highlights (2) Manuals (7) News (14) Notifications (130) Schedules (1) |
|
2017 (9) TMI 935 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondent, allowing the refund of Service Tax on business auxiliary service for export of goods. It held that the refund claim was filed within the stipulated time frame under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, emphasizing the date of Service Tax payment. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's argument regarding the strict time limit under Notification No. 41/2007-ST, citing the Delhi High Court's precedent that the right to claim refund must first crystallize. It concluded that the specific provisions of the notification should not override the general provisions of the Central Excise Act.
2018 (2) TMI 399 - CESTAT, ALLAHABAD The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision that spare parts used in maintenance services during the warranty period should be treated as sold, making them exempt from service tax due to sales tax already paid on them. The Tribunal held that the maintenance and repair contract should be considered a works contract, in line with relevant legal precedents and the lack of taxing power under the Finance Act, 1994 to tax material components in a works contract. The respondent-assessee was granted consequential benefits as per the law.
2018 (5) TMI 550 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a service provider in the Erection, Commissioning, and Installation category, regarding the demand of service tax for the Financial Year 2006-07 and penalties under Sections 76 and 77. The tribunal found that the demand was not sustainable as the services provided to Railways were exempted under specific statutory provisions. The appellant's compliance with tax payments, maintenance of proper records, and the exemption for services to Railways led to the appeal being allowed, setting aside the balance demand of tax and penalties under the Finance Act.
2018 (1) TMI 679 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order. It found that the appellant's business involved negotiated terms, including quantity discounts, with no evidence of additional consideration or suppression of facts. The Tribunal deemed the Show Cause Notice presumptive and lacking substantial basis, entitling the appellant to consequential benefits as per the law.
2018 (1) TMI 995 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT The Allahabad HC dismissed a single appeal involving 8 assessees, directing separate appeals for each due to potential confusion. The impugned CESTAT order was returned to the appellant's counsel.
2017 (8) TMI 588 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original as it was based on insufficient evidence, including third-party documents and retracted statements, without direct linkage to the appellants' activities. The demands and penalties were deemed unsustainable, leading to the appeals being allowed and consequential relief granted to the appellants.
2017 (8) TMI 697 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, ruling that the refund of Cenvat credit for Central Excise duty and service tax paid on inputs and input services cannot be denied based on availing Customs duty drawback. The Tribunal held that there is no restriction on refund under Rule-5, even if Customs drawback is claimed. The respondent was deemed entitled to the refund and consequential relief as per law.
2017 (12) TMI 1240 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the Revenue, emphasizing similarities between the present case and the Juhi Alloys Ltd. judgment. The ruling in Juhi Alloys Ltd. was deemed applicable to the present case, leading to the allowance of the Revenue's appeals.
2017 (12) TMI 1277 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the Service Tax demands on various transactions such as sales incentives, commissions, hire purchase charges, job work charges, and freight earned. The Tribunal ruled that these transactions did not fall under taxable Business Auxiliary Services, as contended by the appellant. The issue of limitation was left open for further consideration, granting the appellant consequential benefits according to the law.
2017 (7) TMI 487 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal upheld the classification of goods like Lead Glass Tubings, Flange Tubings, and Exhaust Tubings under Sub-heading No.7008.90 as determined by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal dismissed the appeal by Revenue, finding no fault in the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and rejecting the request for remand to the Original Authority for verification. The respondent was entitled to consequential relief as per law.
2017 (7) TMI 515 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal found the Show Cause Notice unsustainable, setting aside the Order-in-Original and ruling in favor of the appellant. The duty demand for periods before 13.05.2005 was deemed invalid as the duty liability for un-plated jewelry did not exist retroactively. Additionally, the assessment of duty for the period from 13.05.2005 to 10.10.2005 lacked support and failed to establish the necessary criteria for duty imposition, leading to the Notice being considered unsustainable for that period as well.
2018 (1) TMI 248 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case concerning the classification of 'Residual Crude Petroleum Oil' under Tariff Item No.27139000. Citing a previous decision, the Tribunal held that the oil should be classified under Tariff Item No.2709.00.00, setting aside the demand and penalty imposed by the revenue. The show cause notice demanding Central Excise duty and penalties was deemed invalid due to the settled classification. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following precedent decisions and granted the appellant relief in line with the law.
2017 (11) TMI 596 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal upheld the classification of residual crude petroleum oil as 'Residual Crude Petroleum Oil' under Tariff Item No. 2709.00.00, based on a report from IIT, New Delhi. The revenue's appeal challenging this classification was dismissed, affirming the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and rejecting the revenue's contention to classify the residue under Tariff Item No. 2713 90 00.
2017 (6) TMI 929 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The appeal was allowed by the Member (Judicial) as the rejection of the refund claim based on limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, was found erroneous. The limitation period was deemed to start after the month when the goods were sold, not as per Circular No. 06/2008-Cus. The appellant's claim for refund of ?59,449/- for SAD was upheld, and the Adjudicating Authority was directed to process the refund with interest within 60 days.
2017 (7) TMI 50 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by M/s Shanti Surgical Pvt. Ltd., Shri Shanket Kheria, and Shri Subhash Chandra Kheria, dismissing the appeals filed by Revenue. The judgment emphasized that specific tariff entries should prevail over general descriptions, invalidating demands and penalties based on incorrect classification under Chapter 3005. Penalties were set aside as the classification adopted by the appellants was deemed valid under specific entries.
2017 (6) TMI 47 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD upheld the respondent-assessee's entitlement to Cenvat credit for the purchase of raw material from M/s M.K. Steels. The Tribunal found that the respondent had received the goods with proper documentation and had taken reasonable steps to ensure duty payment on inputs. Relying on legal precedents and Rule 9(3) of the Rules of 2004, the Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals and granted consequential benefits to the respondent-assessee, aligning with the principle that an assessee must take reasonable steps to confirm duty payment without undue burden.
2017 (12) TMI 317 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld interest payment from the deposit date to the refund date. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to comply with the interest payment within 60 days, granting the respondent liberty to ensure timely action.
2017 (7) TMI 838 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the demand and penalties imposed on M/s Kisan Gramodyog Sansthan. It held that the appellant was entitled to exemptions under relevant notifications, as the Revenue misclassified products and failed to prove the use of power in manufacturing. The Tribunal found no intention to evade duty, granting the appellant consequential benefits and acknowledging their entitlement to Modvat/Cenvat credit on raw materials purchased from a registered dealer.
2017 (5) TMI 948 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original, allowing the appeal as the revenue failed to establish clandestine manufacture and clearance as per legal standards. The appellant was granted consequential relief, emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence and compliance with legal requirements in cases involving allegations of clandestine activities for fair adjudication.
2017 (4) TMI 1325 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD The case involved the disallowance of Cenvat credit and duty liability for a shortage of the final product, as well as penalties imposed on the parties. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of M/s JRW and its Authorized Signatory, holding that they took reasonable steps. However, the appeals of Mr. Neeraj Agarwal and M/s KE were dismissed, and penalties were confirmed as they were found to be part of the fraudulent scheme.
|
