TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellate tribunal affirms 75% abatement benefit for assessees under Notification No.32/2004-ST.</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem Versus 1) Raghav Industries Ltd., 2) Kamadgiri Industries Ltd., 3) Srinidhi Industries</h3> The appellate tribunal upheld the benefit of abatement of 75% under Notification No.32/2004-ST for the assessees, as they had produced declarations from ... Notification No.32/2004-ST dt. 3.12.04- the Revenue in the present appeals on the ground that the assessees did not follow the procedure prescribed under the Board’s circular dt. 27.7.2005 and did not produce declarations of GTA. In the light of the decision of CCE Vapi Vs Unimark Remedies 2009 -TMI - 34416 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD, Commissioner (Appeals) held that abatement is admissible to the assessees. Held that- the benefit of abatement under Notification No.32/20004 cannot be denied to the assessees. Therefore, no reason to interfere with the impugned orders and accordingly uphold the same and dismiss the appeals. The appellate tribunal upheld the benefit of abatement of 75% under Notification No.32/2004-ST for the assessees, as they had produced declarations from GTA and did not violate any procedures. The appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
