Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.24 seconds)Meenaskshi Food Products Pvt Ltd vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Vapi on 19 October, 2015
As held by the Hon'ble Tribunal in
Meenakshi Food Products (P) Ltd v CCE - 2019 (370) ELT 1330, the Show
Cause Notice to which the Appellants were made parties, was not for
confiscation of goods and for that reason also, Rule 26 did not apply.
4.5 It has been further argued that Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules
2002 can have no application in case of Compounded Levy under Section
3A and the Rules thereunder which are a separate and complete scheme as
16 | P a g e E/12381&12383-12385/2014-DB
regards demand for duty, confiscation and penalty. However, since we have
decided the issue on merits, we are not giving any finding on this issue and
the same is kept open.
Section 266 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 270 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 266 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
Section 5 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
M/S. Kelvin Infotech Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs on 15 October, 2014
Basudev Garg v CC - 2013 (294) ELT 353
Andaman Timber Industries v CC - 2015 (324) ELT 641 (SC)
Kelvin Industries v CCE- 2023 (3) CENTAX 252.
Section 270 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
1