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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Central Excise

        2017 (5) TMI 1455 - AT - Central Excise

        📋
        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

        Appeals Dismissed Due to Fraudulent Activities and Penalties Upheld The judgment dismissed all appeals, finding them devoid of merit based on established fraudulent activities, forged documents, and legal precedents ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Appeals Dismissed Due to Fraudulent Activities and Penalties Upheld

                          The judgment dismissed all appeals, finding them devoid of merit based on established fraudulent activities, forged documents, and legal precedents supporting duty demands and penalties imposed on the appellants. The authorities upheld duty demands and penalties due to the involvement of fraud, rejecting the appellants' plea of innocence based on following proper payment procedures under the Compounded Levy Scheme. The time bar for duty demands was extended, justifying the penalties imposed.




                          Issues:
                          - Dispute regarding the genuineness of Appendix-II challans submitted for central excise duty payment.
                          - Allegation of forged documents leading to loss of Government revenue.
                          - Appellants' defense of following proper payment procedure under Compounded Levy Scheme.
                          - Allegation of fraudulent activity within bank premises.
                          - Department's failure to detect forgery earlier.
                          - Applicability of duty demand and penalty.
                          - Legal precedents cited by both parties.
                          - Time bar for duty demand.

                          Issue 1: Dispute regarding the genuineness of Appendix-II challans:
                          The appellants, engaged in manufacturing stainless steel products under the Compounded Levy Scheme, faced allegations that the duty payment documents submitted were forged, leading to a loss of Government revenue. The Revenue initiated action against the appellants to recover central excise duty and impose penalties. The lower authorities confirmed duty demands and penalties, prompting the present appeals.

                          Issue 2: Allegation of fraudulent activity within bank premises:
                          The appellants argued that unauthorized individuals within the bank premises, including one individual named Shri Sachin, committed the fraud by forging duty payment documents. The appellants maintained that they followed the prescribed procedure, deposited the duty at the authorized bank, and produced stamped challans to the central excise officer. The police investigation supported the appellants' claim of innocence and highlighted the fraudulent activities within the bank.

                          Issue 3: Department's failure to detect forgery earlier:
                          The appellants contended that the Department's failure to detect the forgery promptly should not absolve them of duty payment obligations. The Department's inquiry into the fraudulent activity led to the discovery of forged documents submitted by the appellants, which were not legally recognized. The appellants' argument of innocence based on following the payment procedure was deemed insufficient by the authorities.

                          Issue 4: Applicability of duty demand and penalty:
                          The Department maintained that the submission of forged documents by the appellants resulted in the loss of Government revenue, justifying duty demands and penalties. The authorities emphasized that the appellants' plea of innocence due to the bank's involvement in the fraud was not legally sustainable, as the duty paid documents were invalid and could not justify the clearance of excisable goods.

                          Issue 5: Legal precedents cited by both parties:
                          The appellants cited various legal precedents to support their argument that they should not be held liable for duty demands in the circumstances of the case. However, the authorities relied on judgments, including those from the Tribunal and the Supreme Court, to establish that the demands were rightly confirmed by invoking the extended period due to the involvement of fraud and forged documents.

                          Issue 6: Time bar for duty demand:
                          The appellants raised the question of the time bar for duty demands, emphasizing certain legal cases. However, the authorities referenced a Supreme Court judgment and a Tribunal decision to support the extension of the period of limitation due to the involvement of fraud, thereby justifying the duty demands and penalties imposed on the appellants.

                          In conclusion, the judgment dismissed all appeals, finding them devoid of merit based on the established fraudulent activities, forged documents, and the legal precedents supporting the duty demands and penalties imposed on the appellants.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found