Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. G.K. Plastic

Commissioner of Central Excise, vs G.K. Plastic

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Oct 29, 2001
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/26398

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On
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

Commissioner of Central Excise,

Respondent

G.K. Plastic

Excerpt

1. the revenue is aggrieved by that part of the order of the commissioner (appeals) by which he has held that the respondents are entitled to take modvat credit of rs. 1,60,862/- on the strength of endorsed bill of entry.2. on hearing both sides and nothing that in a long line of decisions including that of in the case of krishna insulations v. cce [1996 (84) ecr 452 (t) (relied upon by the lower appellate authority) and cce, jaipur v. j.k. synthetics [2001 (96) ecr 409], the tribunal has held that credit is available on the strength of endorsed bill of entry, i see no merit in the appeal of the revenue and accordingly dismiss the same.

Full Judgment

1. The Revenue is aggrieved by that part of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) by which he has held that the respondents are entitled to take modvat credit of Rs. 1,60,862/- on the strength of endorsed Bill of Entry.

2. On hearing both sides and nothing that in a long line of decisions including that of in the case of Krishna Insulations v. CCE [1996 (84) ECR 452 (T) (relied upon by the lower Appellate Authority) and CCE, Jaipur v. J.K. Synthetics [2001 (96) ECR 409], the Tribunal has held that credit is available on the strength of endorsed Bill of Entry, I see no merit in the appeal of the Revenue and accordingly dismiss the same.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial