C.C.E., Chandigarh Vs. M/S. Smithkline Beechem Consumer

C.C.E., Chandigarh vs M/S. Smithkline Beechem Consumer

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided May 30, 2001

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/23482

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/23482
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On: May 30, 2001
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

C.C.E., Chandigarh

Respondent

M/S. Smithkline Beechem Consumer

Excerpt

1. when the case was called, none appeared on behalf of the respondents, in spite of notice. therefore, the appeal being taken up in the absence of the respondents.3. in this case, the issue is in respect of admissibility of modvat credit on hsd oil. the commissioner (appeals), in the impugned order, vacated the order-in-original on the ground that the respondents had debited the entire amount in dispute.4. the contention of the revenue is that vide impugned order, the appeal filed by the respondents, was allowed. the respondents are not entitled for the benefit of modvat credit in respect of hsd oil.therefore, the appeal cannot be allowed by the commissioner (appeals).clause (1) of section 112 of the finance act, 2000 provides that no credit of any duty paid on high speed diesel oil at any time during the period commencing on and from the 16th day of march, 1995 and ending with the day, the finance act, 2000 received the assent of the president, shall be deemed to be admissible.5. in view of these provisions of finance act, the respondents are not entitled for the benefit of credit on hsd oil. the order passed by the commissioner (appeals) is set aside and the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed.

Full Judgment

1. When the case was called, none appeared on behalf of the respondents, in spite of notice. Therefore, the appeal being taken up in the absence of the respondents.

3. In this case, the issue is in respect of admissibility of MODVAT Credit on HSD Oil. The Commissioner (Appeals), in the impugned order, vacated the order-in-original on the ground that the respondents had debited the entire amount in dispute.

4. The contention of the revenue is that vide impugned order, the appeal filed by the respondents, was allowed. The respondents are not entitled for the benefit of MODVAT Credit in respect of HSD Oil.

Therefore, the appeal cannot be allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals).

Clause (1) of Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2000 provides that no credit of any duty paid on high speed diesel oil at any time during the period commencing on and from the 16th day of March, 1995 and ending with the day, the Finance Act, 2000 received the assent of the President, shall be deemed to be admissible.

5. In view of these provisions of Finance Act, the respondents are not entitled for the benefit of credit on HSD Oil. The order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties C.C.E., Chandigarh vs M/S. Smithkline Beechem Consumer Same Subject Service Tax