Plastichemix Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Plastichemix Industries vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Sep 07, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/25520

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/25520
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Sep 07, 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

Plastichemix Industries

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Excerpt

1. the question involved in this case is about the exigibility of the modvat credit as to registration of the dealers who would give the duty paying documents, namely invoice. the only point here is that the assessee has so called endorsed it one unit to another and under these circumstances question arises whether this is entitled for modvat credit.2. in may view the same is not available in view of the judgment of the larger bench of the tribunal in the case of balmer lawrie & co. ltd. v.cce 2000 (116) elt 364 which is decided against the assessee. following the same, i dismiss the case of the appellant. appeal dismissed.

Full Judgment

1. The question involved in this case is about the exigibility of the modvat credit as to registration of the dealers who would give the duty paying documents, namely invoice. The only point here is that the assessee has so called endorsed it one unit to another and under these circumstances question arises whether this is entitled for modvat credit.

2. In may view the same is not available in view of the judgment of the larger bench of the Tribunal in the case of Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. v.CCE 2000 (116) ELT 364 which is decided against the assessee. Following the same, I dismiss the case of the appellant. Appeal dismissed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Plastichemix Industries vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Service Tax