Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal Upholds Entity Status for M/s. DPK & M/s. Glolite under Notification 175/86</h1> <h3>DPK ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BANGALORE</h3> The Tribunal upheld the separate entity status of M/s. DPK and M/s. Glolite, allowing them to claim benefits individually under Notification 175/86. ... Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Grounds - Appeal - Order-in-original - SSI Exemption - Clubbing of clearances - Seizure - Mahazar witness Issues Involved:1. Clubbing of clearances of M/s. DPK and M/s. Glolite for determining benefits under Notification 175/86.2. Disallowance of Modvat credit claimed by M/s. Glolite.3. Confiscation of DG Sets and imposition of penalties on M/s. DPK and M/s. Glolite.4. Validity of the remand order by CEGAT for de novo adjudication.5. Evaluation of corroborative evidence and statements during de novo adjudication.6. Eligibility of M/s. Glolite as an independent manufacturer.Detailed Analysis:1. Clubbing of Clearances:The Revenue argued that M/s. DPK and M/s. Glolite should have their clearances clubbed to determine eligibility under Notification 175/86. The initial adjudication by the Collector confirmed this, but the Commissioner in the de novo adjudication found no corroborative evidence to support clubbing. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's finding, noting that the adjudicator had properly evaluated the material and concluded that the two firms were distinct entities entitled to separate benefits under Notification 175/86.2. Disallowance of Modvat Credit:The show cause notice proposed disallowing Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 17,16,577.37 availed by M/s. Glolite. The Commissioner in the de novo adjudication allowed the Modvat credit, which the Tribunal upheld, finding no valid grounds in the Revenue's appeal to challenge this conclusion.3. Confiscation and Penalties:The initial order included the confiscation of 8 DG Sets and penalties on M/s. DPK and M/s. Glolite. The Commissioner's de novo adjudication dropped the demands of duty and allowed Modvat credit but ordered confiscation of 3 DG Sets with a redemption fine. The Tribunal found no reason to disturb this finding, noting that the Commissioner had considered the totality of the evidence.4. Remand Order Validity:The Revenue questioned the remand order by CEGAT, arguing it was incorrect to remand the case when the witness avoided appearing. The Tribunal dismissed this ground, stating the remand order had attained finality and could not be altered. The Commissioner had complied with the remand order by conducting a cross-examination of Smt. Narmada Kumari and considering the consequences.5. Evaluation of Evidence:The Revenue contended that the Commissioner had not evaluated corroborative evidence such as unauthorized shifting of premises, lack of manufacturing facilities, and managerial control by M/s. DPK. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner had indeed evaluated these aspects in detail, noting that the units had separate registrations and there was no financial interdependence proving clubbing was necessary. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's grounds, stating they were vague and unsupported by specific evidence.6. Eligibility of M/s. Glolite as Independent Manufacturer:The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner had recognized M/s. Glolite as an independent manufacturer, and this finding was not disputed by the Board. The Tribunal found no merit in the Commissioner (Appeals) remand order, which had set aside the Assistant Commissioner's order and remanded the case for a fresh decision. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's finding that M/s. Glolite was an independent manufacturer entitled to Modvat credit and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal (No. E/1143/96) on the grounds that no valid points were made for decision. It also allowed the appeal by M/s. DPK Engineers (No. 1350/99), setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) remand order and affirming the independent status of M/s. Glolite as a manufacturer. Both appeals were disposed of accordingly.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found