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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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
  • 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

        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>Court upholds excise duty on levy sugar, dismisses petition. Rates as per Notification 35/76. No appeal certificate granted. /76</h1> The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the imposition and realization of excise duty and additional excise duty at the rates of 15% and 5% on ... Incentive Scheme for higher production of sugar Issues Involved:1. Imposition and realization of Excise duty and additional Excise duty on levy sugar.2. Interpretation of Notification No. 35/76 and subsequent notifications.3. Eligibility for excise duty concessions under the incentive scheme.4. Determination of applicable rates of Excise duty and additional Excise duty on levy sugar.Detailed Analysis:1. Imposition and Realization of Excise Duty and Additional Excise Duty on Levy Sugar:The petitioner, a Co-operative Sugar Factory, sought orders to prevent respondents from imposing or realizing Excise duty and additional Excise duty at the rates of 15% and 5% respectively on levy sugar. The factory commenced production in November 1975 and was entitled to certain incentives, including concessions in excise duties, as per Government Orders and Notification No. 35/76-C.E. dated 26th April 1976. The petitioner argued that the rates of 15% and 5% were reduced by subsequent notifications, and thus, the demand for the sum of Rs. 6,25,973.63 was illegal.2. Interpretation of Notification No. 35/76 and Subsequent Notifications:The court examined Notification No. 35/76, which provided excise duty concessions to new sugar factories commencing production after 1st April 1974. The notification exempted sugar produced in excess of 35% of its production from excise duty in excess of 15% and 5%, calculated on the price determined for levy sugar. The court noted that this notification provided a consolidated scheme of benefits, including a lower rate of duty for a portion of free sale sugar and excise duty calculated on the price fixed for levy sugar.3. Eligibility for Excise Duty Concessions Under the Incentive Scheme:The petitioner's factory, being a new unit, was eligible for the incentives, which included a higher percentage of levy-free sugar quota and reduced excise duties. The petitioner had obtained a certificate of eligibility from Respondent No. 2. However, the audit party raised an objection regarding the excise duties payable, leading to a demand notice. The petitioner contended that the excise duty rates had been reduced by subsequent notifications and that the demand was based on a misinterpretation of Notification No. 35/76.4. Determination of Applicable Rates of Excise Duty and Additional Excise Duty on Levy Sugar:The court analyzed various notifications issued by the Government of India, including Notification Nos. 223/76, 226/76, 251/76, 254/76, 279/76, 317/77, 81/78, and 153/78, which purported to amend the rates of excise duty on levy sugar. The court found that none of these notifications referred to or superseded Notification No. 35/76. The court concluded that the rates of 15% and 5% specified in Notification No. 35/76 remained applicable to the petitioner's factory, as the notification provided a specific incentive scheme for new sugar factories.Conclusion:The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the demand for excise duty and additional excise duty at the rates of 15% and 5% was justified and in accordance with Notification No. 35/76. The court rejected the petitioner's contention that subsequent notifications reduced the applicable rates for levy sugar produced by new sugar factories. The court also denied the petitioner's request for a certificate under Article 134-A to appeal to the Supreme Court, finding no substantial question of law of general importance involved.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found