Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.60 seconds)
N M D C Limited vs Rangareddy - G S T on 17 September, 2018 cites

Cce, Raipur vs M/S Aarti Sponge & Power Limited on 23 September, 2016

4. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that they had contested the demand both on merits as well as on limitation before the first appellate authority. They further contested that no penalty can be imposed on them (3) Appeal No: E//30543/2018 alleging suppression of facts with an intent to evade payment of duty for the reason that they are the Public Sector Undertaking and have no intention of avoiding payment of duty or irregularly availing CENVAT credit. Before the first appellate authority, he also relied on the cases of CCE Raipur vs. Arti Sponge & Power Ltd. 2017(350)ELT 268 (Tri.-Del.)] to argue that iron ore fines which are produced during the process of manufacture of sponge iron ore are not a manufactured product at all and therefore Rule 6(3) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 does not apply in this case. This was recorded in the order of the first appellate authority.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 4 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Gujarat State Fertilizers Chemicals ... vs Cce & St- Vadodara-I on 15 February, 2018

Appellant further relied upon the case of Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. vs. CCE Vaddra [2015(38)STR 1165 (Tri.-Ahmd)] to assert that a Government undertaking cannot be alleged to have illegally gained any amount by violation and therefore the extended period of limitation cannot be sustained. However, in the findings, the first appellate authority has only considered the aspect of imposition of penalty and has not examined the contention of the appellant on merits that they were not required to reverse duty under Rule 6(3) on the value of iron ore fine generated by them.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 1 - Cited by 5 - Full Document
1