Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.38 seconds)

Kalline Tea Estate vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 10 September, 2001

The substantial question No. 3 that limitation is not applicable to the Notification No. 33/99-C.E. is answered in favour of the appellant in view of the clear prescription under the Notification No. 33/99-C.E. itself as well as in view of the Judgments rendered by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in M/s Jokai Agri Plantations Pvt. Ltd (Supra) and in Vernerpur Tea Estate (supra). However, the prescription under Notification No. 33/99-C.E. for claiming exemptions or refunds must be strictly complied with in order Page No.# 24/24 to avail the exemption thereunder, notwithstanding limitation not being applicable as per the said notification.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Calcutta Cites 1 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Mokaibari Kanoi Tea Estate P.Ltd vs United Bank Of India on 4 December, 2013

The First Appellate Authority in Mokalbari Konoi Tea Estate(supra) came to a finding that certain information and documents were found to have been submitted by the said assessee. However, in the absence of the department asking for further details, the First Appellate Authority held that the assessee was entitled to the refund under Notification No. 33/99- C.E. The said view was upheld by the Co-ordinate Bench and the appeal Page No.# 22/24 was allowed directing the implementation of the order of the Appellate Authority within a period of 6(six) weeks from the date of the Judgment and Order.
Calcutta High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - A K Banerjee - Full Document
1