9911796707
| TMI General Search |
|
Advanced Search Options
Showing 41 to 60 of 515 Records Search Text: Denim |
| Search Results |
| Acts / Rules (7) Articles (2) Case-Laws (402) Circulars (36) DBK (12) Short Notes (2) Highlights (3) News (7) Notifications (29) Schedules (12) Tariff Tables (3) |
|
2015 (1) TMI 1031 - CESTAT NEW DELHI The Tribunal held that spare parts used to replace old machinery parts became part of the machinery, not increasing its value. Therefore, customs duty was not applicable on the spare parts during debonding. The duty payable was based on raw materials and depreciated capital goods' value. The Tribunal found the appellant not guilty of suppressing information and deemed the extended limitation period unjustified. The order demanding customs duty, interest, and penalty was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
2014 (9) TMI 536 - MADRAS HIGH COURT The Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the process undertaken by the assessee using the 'MONTFORT' machine did not amount to manufacture under the Act. The Court emphasized the need to appeal duty-related matters to the Supreme Court, as in this case, which involved product classification issues beyond its jurisdiction. The Department's appeal was rejected, allowing them to approach the Supreme Court within 60 days for further review.
2014 (9) TMI 544 - CESTAT CHENNAI The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, granting them exemption benefits under relevant notifications and dismissing the service tax demands on services provided by foreign entities. The appellants were found eligible for exemption benefits under Notification No. 14/2004-ST for charges paid to foreign service providers for various services, including Business Exhibition service and Technical Inspection and Certification Service. The Tribunal emphasized that services performed outside India by foreign service providers do not attract service tax liability, leading to the dismissal of the tax demands.
2014 (6) TMI 830 - CESTAT CHENNAI The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding service tax liability for Business Exhibitions and Technical Inspection and Certification Services conducted abroad. Citing relevant case law and Taxation of Services Rules, the Tribunal found no service tax liability when services are provided abroad by a foreign service provider. The Commissioner's previous allowance of the appellant's contention for a subsequent period supported this decision, leading to the appeal being allowed and the impugned order set aside for both issues.
2015 (8) TMI 812 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad granted an extension of stay in accordance with the Larger Bench decision in IPCL Vs. CCE Vadodara. The stay was extended for an additional six months or until the appeals are disposed of, whichever occurs first.
2014 (6) TMI 649 - CESTAT NEW DELHI The Tribunal allowed the appeals by M/s. C. Denim, granting them relief in the dispute over Cenvat credit for inputs in their captive power plant. The decision emphasized the integration of the power plant with the factory for tax purposes, rejecting the Commissioner's objections and supporting the appellant's position. The Tribunal highlighted the consistency in legal positions and set aside the lower authorities' denial of credit, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellants.
2013 (11) TMI 501 - CESTAT CHENNAI The tribunal ruled that handling cotton waste by job workers for conversion into cotton yarn within the applicant's factory premises did not constitute Cargo Handling Service under the Finance Act, 1994. The charges imposed by the applicant for handling the waste were deemed not justifiable as Cargo Handling Service charges. The decision favored the applicant, emphasizing that the activity was for their own benefit and did not involve handling goods as Cargo. As a result, the appeal was accepted without a pre-deposit requirement, and collection of dues was stayed pending the appeal. The judgment underscores the importance of the purpose and context of activities in determining their tax classification.
2013 (4) TMI 358 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD The Tribunal allowed the restoration of the appeal dismissed for non-prosecution due to the appellant's health reasons, including a history of cancer and heart attacks, ongoing medical treatments, and memory lapses. Considering the appellant's advanced age and health issues, the Tribunal recalled the dismissal order, restored the appeal, and updated the appellant's address. This decision emphasizes the importance of valid reasons for restoring appeals and demonstrates a fair approach in balancing legal proceedings with health constraints, setting a precedent for addressing genuine health concerns affecting active participation in legal matters.
2012 (12) TMI 1128 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT The Division Bench allowed Sicom Limited's appeal against the Company Petition, deeming it not maintainable under Section 391(1) of the Companies Act. The Apex Court permitted the substitution of Mishapar Investments Limited for Sicom Limited after settlement between the parties. The matter was remanded to the Company Judge for consideration under Section 391 of the Companies Act, with no objections from the parties. Mishapar Investments Limited was authorized to replace Sicom Limited in Company Petition No.34 of 2009.
2014 (2) TMI 281 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT The appeal challenging the order under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, based on a voluntary deposit during investigation and a time-barred show cause notice, was dismissed. The Tribunal held that payments for time-barred demands cannot be considered voluntary towards duty once the demand is deemed time-barred. The payments made during the investigation for the revised amount were found invalid, as the entire demand was declared beyond the limitation period. The Tribunal affirmed the adjudicating authority's decision on the limitation issue, rendering the payments invalid.
2012 (9) TMI 36 - ITAT, MUMBAI The Tribunal allowed the assessee's miscellaneous application, amending the order for the assessment year 2003-04 to compute the profit eligible for deduction under section 80HHC without adjustments for brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation. The Tribunal's decision emphasized the importance of recent legal precedents in interpreting tax laws for fair treatment of taxpayers. The issues regarding the computation of profit eligible for deduction under section 80HHC and adjustments while computing book profits under section 115JB were resolved in favor of the assessee.
2012 (3) TMI 124 - CESTAT, MUMBAI The applicants sought waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest, and penalty totaling Rs.98,12,540. The demand of Rs.3,95,771 for Cenvat credit of service tax paid by job work was confirmed. Another demand of Rs.94,16,769 was confirmed for denying credit of service tax on courier services for transporting samples. The Tribunal directed the applicants to deposit Rs.10 lakhs within eight weeks, with the remaining pre-deposit waived during the appeal's pendency. The judgment emphasized the importance of evidence and compliance with legal obligations in tax disputes.
2014 (5) TMI 52 - Madras High Court The High Court directed the second respondent to cease coercive actions and refrain from taking any steps until the stay petition was resolved. The writ petition was disposed of without costs, aiming to uphold fairness and procedural justice for the petitioner amidst the Appellate Tribunal's delay in functioning due to lack of quorum.
2011 (12) TMI 351 - ITAT, Mumbai The Tribunal allowed the license and technology fees as revenue expenditure, overruling the capital expenditure treatment by the AO and CIT(A). The deduction under Section 80HHC was disallowed while computing book profit under Section 115JB, following the Supreme Court's judgment. Reopening of assessment under Section 147 and the notice under Section 143(2) were deemed unnecessary due to the allowance of the assessee's claims. The claim for depreciation if royalty payment was disallowed became irrelevant as the Tribunal considered the payment as revenue expenditure.
2012 (11) TMI 436 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD The appeal was allowed as the confirmation of the demand of the amount paid by the appellant during the case was set aside due to being time-barred under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The adjudicating authority's findings emphasized the delay in action by the department and the lack of appeal by Revenue authorities against the limitation issue. Consequently, the appellant was granted consequential relief, highlighting the importance of adhering to limitation periods in demanding duties and the significance of challenging such demands on legal grounds.
2011 (3) TMI 1751 - CESTAT Ahmedabad The appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad due to the non-appearance of the appellants despite notices and adjournments.
2011 (3) TMI 29 - CESTAT, CHENNAI The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case involving the incorrect calculation of duty rates for specific goods sent to the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) and the confirmation of duty demand and penalty by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellants, a 100% EOU, were absolved from paying the differential duty as the Tribunal emphasized proper valuation of sub-standard goods and adherence to prescribed duty rates, ultimately setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeals in favor of the appellants.
2011 (1) TMI 883 - CESTAT, CHENNAI The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, CHENNAI ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside a demand of customs duty on goods imported and cleared from Customs Bonded Warehouse. The tribunal found that the DEPB scrip was registered at the warehouse, enabling the utilization of DEPB credit by the assessees. The appeal was allowed.
2010 (11) TMI 416 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI The Tribunal granted a stay on the Commissioner's decision to deny cenvat credit and impose penalties of Rs. 10,26,89,238/- due to lack of proper analysis and application of relevant laws. The Tribunal found that the power plant within the factory premises did not qualify as an independent factory under the Factories Act and Income Tax Act. As there was no evidence to support the power plant being a separate legal entity, the Tribunal allowed the appeal without requiring a pre-deposit, stayed the impugned order, and expedited the appeal for an early hearing to address the substantial financial implications efficiently.
2010 (9) TMI 1291 - ITAT MUMBAI The Tribunal allowed the claim of foreign exchange loss as revenue expenditure under section 37(1), except for the portion attributable to fixed assets, which should be treated under section 43A. The issue of adjustment under section 145A was directed to adjust both opening and closing stocks. Regarding prior period expenses, the Tribunal directed the re-examination of certain disallowed expenses and allowed deductions for legal and professional fees. The appeal was partly allowed with specified adjustments and re-examinations.
|
