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

        2022 (3) TMI 935 - 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

        Appeal allowed for incorrect CENVAT credit & duty on scrap sales. Scrap items found non-excisable. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants regarding incorrect availment and utilization of CENVAT credit and short payment of duty on scrap sales. ...
                        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.

                            Appeal allowed for incorrect CENVAT credit & duty on scrap sales. Scrap items found non-excisable.

                            The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants regarding incorrect availment and utilization of CENVAT credit and short payment of duty on scrap sales. The Tribunal concluded that the scrap items in question were non-excisable, leading to the rejection of the duty demand. Legal precedents and circulars were cited to support the decision, emphasizing the distinction between manufactured goods subject to excise duty and non-excisable waste or by-products. The findings of the Commissioner were deemed unsustainable, and the Department's request for remand was rejected.




                            Issues:
                            1. Incorrect availment and utilization of CENVAT credit.
                            2. Incorrect availment of CENVAT credit of service tax on ineligible import services.
                            3. Short payment of duty on scrap sales.

                            Issue 1: Incorrect availment and utilization of CENVAT credit

                            The appellants were engaged in manufacturing motor vehicle parts, and discrepancies were observed during an audit, leading to a show cause notice proposing recovery of service tax and Central Excise duty. The appeal against the proposal was partly allowed, dropping the demand for certain CENVAT credit amounts. However, a difference in the amount of scrap sale was confirmed, as the appellant failed to produce invoices to substantiate that the scrap sold without duty payment was non-excisable. The appellant argued that the scrap not generated in the manufacturing process was non-excisable, relying on legal precedents and CBIC circulars. The Department emphasized the lack of invoices and requested remand for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal observed that most of the scrap items were not the result of deliberate manufacturing activity, leading to a discussion on the definition of "manufacture" under the Central Excise Act. It was concluded that the scrap in question was non-excisable, and the demand for duty was deemed improper and illegal. The findings of the Commissioner were held unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed.

                            Issue 2: Incorrect availment of CENVAT credit of service tax on ineligible import services

                            The appeal addressed the incorrect availment of CENVAT credit for service tax paid by the corporate office during the impugned period. The Tribunal found that the availment of CENVAT credit for service tax on import services was available to the appellants, leading to the dropping of the demand for certain amounts. The legal arguments and reliance on precedents were similar to those presented for the first issue. The Tribunal's decision on the non-excisability of certain scrap items also impacted the overall outcome of the appeal.

                            Issue 3: Short payment of duty on scrap sales

                            The key contention in this issue revolved around the duty payment on specific scrap items sold by the appellants. The Department highlighted the lack of invoices, while the appellant argued that certain scrap items were non-excisable due to not being generated in the manufacturing process. The Tribunal's analysis of the nature of the scrap items and the legal principles surrounding excisability formed the basis for setting aside the demand for duty. The decision emphasized the distinction between manufactured goods subject to excise duty and non-excisable waste or by-products. Legal precedents and circulars were cited to support the conclusion that the duty demand on the scrap in question was unjustified. The appeal was allowed, overturning the findings of the Commissioner and rejecting the Department's request for remand.

                            In conclusion, the Tribunal's detailed analysis of the issues related to CENVAT credit availment and duty payment on scrap sales resulted in the appeal being allowed in favor of the appellants. The judgment provided clarity on the excisability of certain scrap items and emphasized the legal requirements for imposing excise duty on manufactured goods.
                            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