Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.69 seconds)
4.Whether Order Is To Be Circulated To ... vs M/S. Jainsons Wool Chambers Ltd on 30 December, 2009 cites

Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Customs And Central ... on 19 March, 2004

As regards the revenues plea that the Tribunals judgment in the case of Sterlite Industries(I) Ltd.(supra) was with regard to Rule 57C, this plea is not correct as Rule 57C is pari-materia with Rule 6(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules,2001, which was in force during the period of dispute and therefore, the ratio of the Tribunals judgment in the case of Sterlite Inds. Ltd. would be applicable to this case also. In view of this, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The Revenues appeal is accordingly dismissed. The Cross Objection filed by the respondent also stands disposed of as above.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 2 - Cited by 30 - Full Document

Indore Steel And Iron Mills Ltd. vs Cce, Indore on 23 January, 2001

3.1 Shri S.K.Bhaskar, learned DR assailed the portion of the impugned order upholding the dropping of the demand for the period from April01 to March03 and pleaded that the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Sterlite Industries(I) Ltd. vs CCE(supra) relied upon by the Commissioner(Appeals) is not applicable to the facts of this case; that the Tribunals judgment in the case of Sterlite Industries(I) Ltd. is with regard to the provisions of Rule 57C which were no longer there during the period of dispute, that the Tribunal had referred a similar issue to the Larger Bench in the case of Modi Sales vide order No.653/06-SM dt.18.12.06; that the Deptt.s appeal against the Tribunals judgment in the case of Indore Steel & Iron Mills Ltd. vs CCE, Indore reported in 2002(147)ELT.611 is pending before Honble High Court; that the Tribunal in the case of Tata Motors Ltd. vs CCE, Pune reported in 2009(243)ELT.353 has taken a contrary view holding that when job worker uses own inputs and takes Cenvat credit for manufacture of goods for himself as well as on job work basis and job work goods are cleared without payment of duty to the principal manufacturer, he would not be entitled to the Cenvat credit in respect of the inputs used for job work goods cleared without payment of duty to the principal manufacturer.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Cites 2 - Cited by 20 - Full Document

Toyota Kirloskar Motors Ltd. vs Cce on 25 June, 2007

3.2 Shri K.K.Sharma, Advocate, learned Counsel for the respondent, pleaded that the Tribunal in a series of judgments starting from Larger Bench judgment in the case of Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd. vs CCE(supra) has held that the job worker who received goods from his principal manufacturer for manufacture of goods on job work and return is entitled to take Cenvat credit of duty in respect of the other inputs used by him even if the job work goods were cleared without payment of duty; that the Tribunals judgment in the case of Sterlite Industries(supra) has been upheld by Honble Bombay High Court vide judgment reported in 2009(244)ELT.A.87 and that the Tribunals judgment in case of Tata Motors Ltd. vs CCE(supra) has been set aside by Honble Bombay High Court vide judgment reported in 2009(244)ELT.377(Bom.) wherein Honble High Court held that all the Courts and Tribunal within the jurisdictional of High Court are bound to follow the law laid down by the Honble High Courts. Shri Sharma also pleaded that the referring order No.653/06-SM(BR) dt.18.12.06 mentioned to in the grounds of appeal by which the single member bench has referred this issue to a Division Bench in the case of Modi Sales has been decided by the Division Bench of the Tribunal against the Revenue vide judgment reported in 2009(235)ELT.356, following Honble M.P.High Courts judgment in the case of Flex Chemicals reported in 2007(216)ELT.359 wherein it has been held that in the case of manufacture of goods on job work basis by a job worker by using some of his own inputs, the job worker is not required to reverse the Cenvat credit of the job work goods are cleared without payment of duty to the principal manufacturer. In view of the above, Shri Sharma pleaded that the impugned order-in-appeal is correct.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu Cites 4 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

M/S. Tata Motors Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Pune I on 21 February, 2008

3.1 Shri S.K.Bhaskar, learned DR assailed the portion of the impugned order upholding the dropping of the demand for the period from April01 to March03 and pleaded that the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Sterlite Industries(I) Ltd. vs CCE(supra) relied upon by the Commissioner(Appeals) is not applicable to the facts of this case; that the Tribunals judgment in the case of Sterlite Industries(I) Ltd. is with regard to the provisions of Rule 57C which were no longer there during the period of dispute, that the Tribunal had referred a similar issue to the Larger Bench in the case of Modi Sales vide order No.653/06-SM dt.18.12.06; that the Deptt.s appeal against the Tribunals judgment in the case of Indore Steel & Iron Mills Ltd. vs CCE, Indore reported in 2002(147)ELT.611 is pending before Honble High Court; that the Tribunal in the case of Tata Motors Ltd. vs CCE, Pune reported in 2009(243)ELT.353 has taken a contrary view holding that when job worker uses own inputs and takes Cenvat credit for manufacture of goods for himself as well as on job work basis and job work goods are cleared without payment of duty to the principal manufacturer, he would not be entitled to the Cenvat credit in respect of the inputs used for job work goods cleared without payment of duty to the principal manufacturer.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 3 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1