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

        2018 (12) TMI 8 - 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

        Court allows CENVAT credit balance post debonding, supporting exporters & consumer protection The court ruled in favor of M/s Technocraft Industries (India) Ltd, allowing the continuity of CENVAT credit balance upon debonding from the '100% Export ...
                      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.

                          Court allows CENVAT credit balance post debonding, supporting exporters & consumer protection

                          The court ruled in favor of M/s Technocraft Industries (India) Ltd, allowing the continuity of CENVAT credit balance upon debonding from the '100% Export Oriented Unit' scheme. The judgment emphasized that denying carry forward of accumulated CENVAT credit to debonding units contradicts the premise of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, burdening exporters with unauthorized duties. The decision highlighted the need for a broader interpretation of the rules to ensure that duty burden is borne by the ultimate consumer, ultimately supporting exporters within the legal framework governing CENVAT credits.




                          Issues:
                          1. Denial of continuity of CENVAT credit balance upon debonding from the '100% Export Oriented Unit' scheme.
                          2. Recovery of utilized credit amount for duty liability post debonding.
                          3. Interpretation of rule 10 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 in the context of debonding units.
                          4. Applicability of CENVAT credit scheme to units operating under export promotion schemes.
                          5. Dispute regarding the burden of duty on exporters and the premise of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

                          Issue 1: Denial of continuity of CENVAT credit balance upon debonding:
                          The case involved M/s Technocraft Industries (India) Ltd debonding from the '100% Export Oriented Unit' scheme and facing denial of continuity of their CENVAT credit balance. The authorities argued that the accumulated credit lapses upon debonding, as new units registered under the Central Excise Act, 1944 are deemed to commence existence afresh without entitlement to transfer provisions. However, the appellant contended that the denial was based on a narrow interpretation of rule 10 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 without considering the scheme's eligibility and the burden it would place on exporters.

                          Issue 2: Recovery of utilized credit amount for duty liability post debonding:
                          The authorities initiated proceedings to recover the utilized credit amount for duty liability post debonding. The appellant argued that the burden placed on exporters contradicts the premise of not saddling export value with duties. The appellant relied on a previous decision and highlighted that the existence of units till debonding was subject to special provisions, and the denial of carry forward would result in taxing exporters as ultimate consumers.

                          Issue 3: Interpretation of rule 10 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004:
                          The case involved a detailed analysis of the interpretation of rule 10 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 in the context of debonding units. The authorities argued that debonding units are not explicitly covered by the rules, while the appellant emphasized the need for a broader examination of the rule's applicability and the scheme's fundamental premise.

                          Issue 4: Applicability of CENVAT credit scheme to units under export promotion schemes:
                          The judgment discussed the applicability of the CENVAT credit scheme to units operating under export promotion schemes. It was noted that such units, despite enjoying exemptions on procurement, are entitled to utilize accumulated CENVAT credit upon clearance of goods for domestic consumption. The judgment emphasized that denying such utilization would burden exporters and go against the scheme's facilitating nature.

                          Issue 5: Dispute regarding the burden of duty on exporters and CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 premise:
                          The judgment delved into the dispute regarding the burden of duty on exporters and the premise of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. It highlighted that the scheme aims to ensure that duty burden is borne by the ultimate consumer and that denying CENVAT credit to exporters would contradict this premise, ultimately burdening exporters with unauthorized duties. The judgment concluded that denying carry forward of accumulated CENVAT credit to debonding units is not legally correct and allowed the appeals.

                          Overall, the judgment addressed the complex issues surrounding the denial of CENVAT credit continuity, recovery of utilized credit post debonding, interpretation of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, applicability of the scheme to units under export promotion schemes, and the burden of duty on exporters within the framework of the law and legal principles governing CENVAT credits.
                          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