Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.38 seconds)C.C.E., Raigad vs M/S. Ispat Metallics Industries ... on 6 May, 2016
3. General Principle: As regards determination of 'place
of removal', in general the principle laid by Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of CCE vs Ispat Industries Ltd
2015 (324) ELT 670 (SC) may be applied.
The Commissioner Of Customs & Central ... vs M/S. Ultratech Cements Ltd on 8 October, 2012
From the above judgment it is thus clear that till the goods are
handed over to the buyer, the cost is borne by the assessee or in other
words where the goods are cleared on FOR basis the freight paid on
outward transportation would qualify as "Input Service". As regard
reliance placed upon by the revenue on the judgment of the Apex Court
in case of Ultratech supra, we find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court was
concerned only with the "place of removal" but did not go into the aspect
of "Point of sale" or the FOR price destination issue. Hence the said
judgment is not applicable in the facts of the present case.
Section 19 in The Sale Of Goods Act, 1930 [Entire Act]
M/S Ultratech Cement Ltd vs Cce, Raipur on 18 November, 2013
Commnr.,Customs & Cent.Excise ... vs M/S. Roofit Industries Ltd on 23 April, 2015
In case of CCE & CU Vs. Roofit
Section 24 in The Sale Of Goods Act, 1930 [Entire Act]
The Sale Of Goods Act, 1930
Commissioner Of Central Excise,Bolpur vs M/S.Ratan Melting & Wire Industries on 14 October, 2008
2008 (2310 ELT 22 (SC) CCE vs Ratan Melting & Wire Industries
2018 (14) GSTL 497 (SC) JK Lakshmi Cement Ltd.
Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs Vasavadatta Cement on 22 January, 2014
CCE vs Ispat Industries Ltd. 2015 (324) ELT 670 (SC)
CCE vs Vasavadatta Cement 2018 (11) GSTL 3 (SC)
2018 (9) GSTL 337 (SC) CCE vs Ultratech Cement Ltd.