Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (1.52 seconds)
Documents citing M/S.Bch Electric Ltd vs Cce,Delhi-Iv on 21 December, 2012

Diamond Beverages Pvt Ltd vs Kolkata South on 17 August, 2023

13. The Ld.Advocate also argued that the demand is barred by limitation of time. It is his submission that the Appellant regularly submitted ER-1 Returns incorporating therein the relevant information in the prescribed format. The said returns were subjected to scrutiny by the departmental officers as per the norms fixed by the Board. Therefore, the Department was at liberty to call for any information, put in query, undertook any verification, if felt necessary. All the factors taken together nullified Department's allegation of willful suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of duty. Accordingly, invocation of extended period is uncalled for. I find that the Tribunal in the case of BCH Electric Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-IV [2013 (31) S.T.R. 68 (Tri.-Del.)] has observed as under:-
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shree Kamrej Vibhag Sahakari vs Commissioner Of Central ... on 24 June, 2015

4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The issue involved in the present proceeding is whether CENVAT credit with respect to services of membership of club is admissible under Rule 2(l) of the Central Excise Rules, 2004 or not. Appellant has relied upon the case of BCH Electric Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-IV, wherein it has been held that services of club membership of India International Centre and IEEMA New Delhi, are admissible as CENVAT credit as per Para 6 of this case law as relation is reproduced below:-
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Hcl Technologies Ltd vs C.C.E. Noida on 10 July, 2015

2. The claim of refund for Car parking Services was denied, referring to Notification No. 5/2006-CE(N.T.) and held that there is no sufficient nexus between the input service and the service exported. The appellants relied on the judgments rendered in BCH Electric Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi-IV 2013 (31) STR 68 (Tri.-Delhi), KPMG Vs. CCE, New Delhi 2014 (33) STR 96 (Tri.-Delhi), CST, Bang. Vs. Mercedes Benz Research & Devlp. India Pvt. Ltd. 2013 (30) STR 257 (Tri.-Bang.). In these cases it has been held that the service of renting Car parking space used for parking of the vehicles of the Officers/Employees of the assessees Company has nexus with the business of the assessee and has to be treated as an activity related to business. Applying the ratio laid in the above judgments I find that appellants are entitled to credit of Rs.37,427/- towards car parking service.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 4 - Cited by 17 - Full Document

Rajratan Global Wire Ltd vs Ujjain on 9 April, 2021

Similarly, with respect to the Club Membership Services, Tribunal Delhi in BCH Electric Ltd. versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi - IV - 2013 (31) S.T.R. 68 (Tri. - Del.) has held that Membership of an association of manufacturers is covered by the definition of input service under Rule 2 (l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as related business activity providing information on technology.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next