Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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

        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 overturns penalties, citing rule timing issue. Appeals can be separate. Natural justice violation found.</h1> <h3>M/s Sahu Refrigeration Industries Ltd, Shri Rajiv Kumar Lohia, Director Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax, Delhi-I</h3> M/s Sahu Refrigeration Industries Ltd, Shri Rajiv Kumar Lohia, Director Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax, Delhi-I - 2015 (330) E.L.T. ... Issues:- Imposition of penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules 2002 on the appellants for issuing invoices without supplying goods to avail inadmissible Cenvat Credit to another party.- Whether the appeals can be decided independently or are dependent on the outcome of the appeal filed by the main noticee.- Violation of the principle of natural justice due to denial of cross-examination of transporters.- Applicability of penalty under Rule 26 during the relevant period.Analysis:1. Imposition of Penalty under Rule 26:The case involved allegations against the appellants for issuing invoices without supplying goods to enable another party to fraudulently claim duty drawback. The penalty was proposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules 2002. The appellant argued that they did not deal with excisable goods for the purpose of availing inadmissible Cenvat Credit. The Tribunal held that the provision for imposing penalties under Rule 26 for issuing invoices without supplying goods came into force from March 1, 2007, which was not applicable during the relevant period of the case. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the penalties were not imposable on the appellants based on the facts presented.2. Independence of Appeals:The respondent argued that the appeals could not be decided independently as the appeal filed by the main noticee was pending before the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal found that the issues against the main noticee and the appellants were different. The main noticee was accused of availing duty drawback fraudulently, while the appellants were accused of facilitating this by issuing invoices without supplying goods. As the issues were distinct, the Tribunal decided that the appeal against the appellants could be independently adjudicated.3. Violation of Natural Justice:The appellant contended a violation of natural justice due to the denial of cross-examination of transporters by the Adjudicating Authority. The appellant argued that the penalty was imposed based on third-party statements without granting cross-examination. The Tribunal noted the denial of cross-examination and held that the principle of natural justice was violated. This violation was a ground for setting aside the impugned order.4. Applicability of Penalty under Rule 26:The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of Rule 26 during the relevant period concerning penalties for certain offenses related to excisable goods. It was observed that the appellants had not dealt with excisable goods but had only issued invoices without supplying the goods. As the provision for penalties in such cases came into force after the relevant period, the Tribunal held that penalties under Rule 26 were not imposable on the appellants. A similar view was supported by a previous case, leading to the setting aside of the penalties imposed on the appellants.In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed on the appellants under Rule 26, allowing the appeals with consequential relief, emphasizing the non-applicability of the penalty provision during the relevant period based on the specific circumstances of the case.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found