Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.22 seconds)
Documents citing Amitex Silk Mills P. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 13 July, 2004

Commissioner vs Shilpa on 25 February, 2010

3. During the pendency of this Tax Appeal, the Revenue has moved Civil Application No.213/2008 for stay against the operation, implementation and execution of the judgment and order dated 27.11.2007/06.02.2008 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad in Appeal No.E/368/2006. The said Civil Application was rejected by this Court on 05.02.2010, by observing that pursuant to the order passed by the Tribunal, the refund has already been received by the assessee and hence there is no question of staying the order passed by the Tribunal. The Court has, further, observed that even while passing the order, the Tribunal has relied on the order in the case of Amitex Silk Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2006 (194) ELT 344 (Tri.Delhi). The Revenue has challenged the said order of the Tribunal before the Apex Court and though the appeal was admitted by the Apex Court, the stay was not permitted.
Gujarat High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - K A Puj - Full Document

M/S. Ercon Composites vs C.C.E. Jaipur on 28 July, 2016

4. The appellants have pleaded categorically that at the time of clearance of the said inputs from their factory against CT-3 certificate the duty stands debited by them in bond equal to the duty amount. They have further contended that such clearances have to be treated as export of goods, in which case they would be entitled to the Cenvat Credit. They referred to the various decisions of the Tribunal laying down that clearances to 100% EOU are to be treated as export clearances, in view of the law laid down by the Larger Bench of the of the Tribunal in the case of Amitex Silk Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE reported at 2006 (72) RLT 11 (CESTAT-LB). If such clearance is to be treated as export clearances the assessee would be entitled to the Cenvat Credit in terms of the Boards Circular No. 283/117/96-CX dated 31.12.1996. They also relied upon the various decisions of the Tribunal.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Commissioner vs Shilpa on 12 January, 2012

Mr. Suryanarayan has submitted that pursuant to the order passed by the CESTAT, the refund has already been received by the opponent-assessee and hence there is no question of staying the order passed by the CESTAT. He has further submitted that even while passing the order, the CESTAT has relied on its own order in the case of Amitex Silk Mills v. CCE. The Revenue has challenged the said order of CESTAT before the Apex Court and though the appeal was admitted by the Apex Court, the stay was not granted.
Gujarat High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - R H Shukla - Full Document

Commissioner vs Shilpa on 5 February, 2010

Mr. Suryanarayan has submitted that pursuant to the order passed by the CESTAT, the refund has already been received by the opponent-assessee and hence there is no question of staying the order passed by the CESTAT. He has further submitted that even while passing the order, the CESTAT has relied on its own order in the case of Amitex Silk Mills v. CCE. The Revenue has challenged the said order of CESTAT before the Apex Court and though the appeal was admitted by the Apex Court, the stay was not granted.
Gujarat High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - K A Puj - Full Document

4. Whether Order Is To Be Circulated To ... vs Cce Surat on 25 August, 2010

3. On an appeal against the above order, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the impugned order by relying upon the majority decision of the Tribunal in the case of Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE 2006 (72) RLT 11 (CESTAT-NDLS). It was held in the said judgment that while arriving at the 50% DTA sales, the value of deemed export is not to be excluded. Accordingly, he set aside the impugned order of the lower authority.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1