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>Appeal dismissed; silver jewellery classed under CETH 7113 not 7114; limitation bar and excise, hedging, credit issues upheld</h1> <h3>Commissioner Of Central Tax, Cochin Versus Kalyan Jewellers India Pvt. Ltd.</h3> SC dismissed the civil appeal, upholding CESTAT's finding that the silver jewellery articles are classifiable under CETH 7113 rather than 7114, noting ... Classification of goods - articles of silver jewellery/ articles of silver - to be classified under CETH 7113 or 7114? - applicability of benefit of exemption under Notification No. 12/2012 dated 17.03.2012 amended - demand of excise duty on goods exported - hedging amounts to trading of goods or not - availing ineligible credit in respect of renting of motor vehicles and repair and maintenance of motor vehicle - Time limitation - it was held by CESTAT that the goods are classifiable under CETH 7113, as there is no evidence to support classification under CETH 7114 - HELD THAT:- There are no palpable error in the finding of CESTAT as regards bar of limitation is concerned. We, therefore, decline to entertain this appeal by leaving the question of law open insofar as classification aspect is concerned. The Civil Appeal is dismissed. The impugned order of the Customs Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) is upheld on limitation grounds: the Court states, 'we do not find any palpable error in the finding of CESTAT as regards bar of limitation is concerned.' The appeal is not entertained on the merits of classification, leaving that 'question of law open insofar as classification aspect is concerned.' The Civil Appeal is dismissed, and all pending applications stand disposed of. The decision rests on procedural limitation, rather than adjudication of substantive classification; no reconsideration of CESTAT's limitation finding was warranted.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
