Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.32 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Central Excise vs M/S Jainsons Wool Coombers Ltd on 7 February, 2011

Sagittarius Metals Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Tax, Bangalore ... on 23 March, 2022

Service Tax Appeal No. 20294 of 2021 Service Tax Appeal No. 20419 of 2017 "The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent produced before this Court an unreported decision in C.M.A. No. 1568 of 2006 dated 18-7-2013, wherein a similar question raised by the Revenue was answered against the Revenue following the decisions of the Bombay High Court reported in 2009 (244) E.L.T. A89 - Commissioner v. Sterlite Industries (I) Limited as well as the Punjab and Haryana High Court reported in 2012 (26) S.T.R. 488 - Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Jainsons Wool Coombers Ltd., which were based on the decision of the Apex Court reported in 2004 (171) E.L.T. 145 - Escorts Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sagittarius Metals Pvt Ltd vs Bangalore-I on 23 March, 2022

Service Tax Appeal No. 20294 of 2021 Service Tax Appeal No. 20419 of 2017 "The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent produced before this Court an unreported decision in C.M.A. No. 1568 of 2006 dated 18-7-2013, wherein a similar question raised by the Revenue was answered against the Revenue following the decisions of the Bombay High Court reported in 2009 (244) E.L.T. A89 - Commissioner v. Sterlite Industries (I) Limited as well as the Punjab and Haryana High Court reported in 2012 (26) S.T.R. 488 - Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Jainsons Wool Coombers Ltd., which were based on the decision of the Apex Court reported in 2004 (171) E.L.T. 145 - Escorts Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Commr. Of Central Excise, Meerut I vs M/S Bajaj Hindusthan Ltd on 29 October, 2015

6. The ld. Counsel for the respondent stated that the issue is no longer res Integra and the same stands settled by the ruling in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Jainsons Wool Coombers Ltd.: 2011 (268) ELT 360 (P & H), wherein the question before Honourable High Court was whether Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules does not debar a unit from taking credit of duty on the quantity of inputs used in manufacture of job worked goods cleared without payment of duty and whether the Tribunal was correct in allowing Cenvat credit by placing reliance on its earlier judgement in the case of Sterlite Industries Ltd. : 2005 (183) ELT 353 without taking into cognizance the provisions of Rule 2(d), 2 (f), 3 and 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat credit rules. The Honourable High Court held that the Tribunal rightly held that clearing of goods at intermediate stage was not at par with clearing of exempted goods. Under the circular of the Board (665/56/2002  CX dated 25/9/02) as well as the scheme of Act and the rules, Cenvat credit is permissible to a job worker and even to a manufacturer at intermediate stage of inputs likely, lubricants, soaps, chemicals, et cetera used in the manufacture of final products on which duty was admittedly paid. Object of Cenvat credit is to avoid cascading effect of duty.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 4 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

The Commissioner Of Central Excise vs Customs Excise & Service Tax on 20 March, 2015

"The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent produced before this Court an unreported decision in C.M.A.No.1568 of 2006 dated 18.07.2013, wherein a similar question raised by the Revenue was answered against the Revenue following the decisions of the Bombay High Court reported in 2009 (244) E.L.T. A89 - Commissioner v. Sterlite Industries (I) Limited as well as the Punjab and Haryana High Court reported in 2012 (26) STR 488  Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Jainsons Wool Coombers Ltd., which were based on the decision of the Apex Court reported in 2004 (171) E.L.T. 145  Escorts Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi.
Madras High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Syschem India Ltd vs Cce & St Panchkula on 27 February, 2014

3. It is seen that the issue is no more res integra and stand settled by the Larger Bench decision in the case of Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd. vs. Commissioner [2005 (183) ELT 353 (Tri-LB)] as also of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CCE, Ludhiana vs. Jainsons Wool Coombers Ltd. [2012 (26) STR 488 (P&H)]. Accordingly after dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of dues, I take up the appeal itself for final disposal.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 2 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1