Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 20 (0.91 seconds)
Gudwin Logistics vs Vadodara-I on 9 November, 2023 cites

M/S Caprihans India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 31 March, 2016

4.3 We also set aside the impugned Commissioner (Appeal)'s order as it has traveled beyond the charges elicited in the show cause notice and in the impugned Order-In-Original While holding the above view, we rely on the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision case of the Caprihans India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise reported in 2017 (51) S.T.R 239(S. C).
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 1 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Paper Products Ltd vs Commnr. Of Central Excise, Mumbai on 12 July, 2007

and Paper Products Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise - 1999 (112) E.L.T. 765 (S.C.) = (1999) 7 SCC 84. If the aforesaid principle is applied to the facts of the present case there does not remain any doubt that the circular issued by the Board is to be considered as binding and cannot be deviated even by the department. On that account also the expression 'clearing and forwarding agent' have to be interpreted in the light of the circular. "
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 52 - A Pasayat - Full Document

M/S. Larsen & Toubro Ltd vs Cce, Chennai on 12 June, 2014

23. Coming to the aspect of expressions in the definition of clearing & forwarding agent, more specifically "directly or indirectly", "in any manner", we find that the larger bench of this Tribunal, in case of Larsen & Toubro v. C.C.E. Chennai, 2006 (3) S.T.R. 321 (Tri-LB) (wherein, I was also one of the Member), had specifically held in Para 10, which is reproduced below :
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 10 - Cited by 7 - Full Document
1   2 Next