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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Central Excise

        2022 (8) TMI 829 - 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

        Appellate Tribunal rules in favor of M/s Vipul Copper Pvt. Ltd. on Cenvat credit admissibility The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD ruled in favor of M/s Vipul Copper Pvt. Ltd. regarding the admissibility of Cenvat credit. The tribunal found that ...
                        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.

                            Appellate Tribunal rules in favor of M/s Vipul Copper Pvt. Ltd. on Cenvat credit admissibility

                            The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD ruled in favor of M/s Vipul Copper Pvt. Ltd. regarding the admissibility of Cenvat credit. The tribunal found that the appellant had complied with statutory requirements, maintaining proper documentation and accounting records to support the receipt and utilization of inputs. Despite allegations of fraudulent credit availment without goods receipt, the tribunal emphasized the lack of concrete evidence of non-receipt and dismissed the department's case. The tribunal highlighted the importance of adhering to Cenvat Credit Rules and shifted the burden of proof to the Revenue, ultimately allowing the appeals filed by the appellants.




                            Issues:
                            1. Admissibility of Cenvat credit based on invoices of registered dealers.
                            2. Allegations of fraudulent availment of credit without receipt of goods.
                            3. Proper documentation and accounting requirements under Central Excise Act and Cenvat Credit Rules.

                            Issue 1: Admissibility of Cenvat credit based on invoices of registered dealers

                            The case involved M/s Vipul Copper Pvt. Ltd. availing Cenvat credit facility based on invoices from registered dealers for raw material. The investigation focused on the transportation of goods from Delhi to Nadiad, raising doubts on the receipt of inputs by the appellant. The appellant argued that the goods did travel between Nadiad and Ahmedabad, and proper documentation, including octroi receipts, invoices, and accounting records, supported the receipt and utilization of inputs. The appellant contended that the department's case lacked evidence of non-receipt of goods at their factory, emphasizing compliance with statutory requirements for availing credit.

                            Issue 2: Allegations of fraudulent availment of credit without receipt of goods

                            The Revenue alleged that M/s Vipul Copper Pvt. Ltd. fraudulently availed Cenvat credit without physically receiving the inputs. However, the tribunal found no evidence of shortage/excess of inputs or finished goods at the appellant's factory. The investigation primarily relied on third-party evidence related to transporters and RTO check posts, without concrete proof of non-receipt of goods by the appellant. The tribunal emphasized that statutory records, including cenvat accounts and payment records, supported the receipt and utilization of inputs, dismissing the department's contention of credit denial based solely on third-party investigations.

                            Issue 3: Proper documentation and accounting requirements under Central Excise Act and Cenvat Credit Rules

                            The tribunal highlighted the importance of complying with Cenvat Credit Rules 2004, emphasizing the receipt of goods by the manufacturer for availing credit based on invoices. It noted that the appellant had recorded the receipt and utilization of goods, maintained proper accounts, and made payments through cheques, meeting the prescribed requirements. Referring to precedents, the tribunal held that burden of proving non-receipt of inputs rested with the Revenue, and in the absence of conclusive evidence, denial of credit was unwarranted. The tribunal set aside the impugned orders, allowing the appeals filed by the appellants with consequential reliefs.

                            This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD highlights the complexities of the case, focusing on the admissibility of Cenvat credit, fraudulent allegations, and compliance with legal documentation and accounting standards under the Central Excise Act and Cenvat Credit Rules.
                            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