Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>Appeal admitted on key legal issues: Previous judgment, Cenvat Credit Rules, demand related to allied activities.</h1> <h3>Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Versus Commissioner</h3> The Bombay HC admitted an appeal focusing on substantial questions of law concerning the application of a previous judgment, interpretation of Cenvat ... Captive consumption - intermediary product - Naphtha - manufacturing of exempted goods - Benefit of Notification No. 67/95 - It is the contention of the appellants that the reversal satisfies the conditions of Notification 67/95 read with Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 - High Court admitted appeal on the following substantial questions of law:- Whether CESTAT was justified in applying the ratio of this Hon’ble High Court judgment in Indorama Synthetics [2007 (7) TMI 315 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY] to the facts in the present case? Whether Tribunal was justified in invoking the ratio of this Hon’ble Court’s judgment in Indorama Synthetics which related to admissibility of credit under Cenvat Credit Rules on one hand land on the other hand holding that provisions relating to meaning assigned to “input” under Cenvat Credit Rules being wider cannot be made applicable for interpretation of exemption Notn.? Whether Tribunal has erred in upholding the demand pertaining to allied activities without considering various submissions made including judgments from various judicial for a, CBEC instructions etc.? The Bombay High Court admitted an appeal based on substantial questions of law regarding the application of a previous judgment to the current case, interpretation of Cenvat Credit Rules, and consideration of various submissions in a demand pertaining to allied activities.