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.

Precision Stamping Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Precision Stamping vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Jun 13, 2005
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/39336

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 Delhi
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue
Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Precision Stamping

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In
(2005)(188)ELT453TriDel

Excerpt

1. in this appeal the issue relates to the denial of the modvat credit of the amount in question to the appellants.2.the credit has been disallowed to the appellants by the id.commissioner (appeals) on the ground that the dealer took over the business from another person and permission for that taking over was not allowed and as such the dealer could not issue the modvatable documents to the appellants. but in my view this ground is not legally tenable. at the time of issuance of invoices, the dealer was registered dealer. the appellants have received the goods from the dealer under the duty paid valid invoices. the actual receipt of the goods received by them, the duty paid character and utilisation of the goods by the appellants in their factory remains undisputed. there is also nothing on the record to suggest if any, proceedings had been initiated against the dealer. under these circumstances, the appellants could not be denied the modvat credit on the basis of the invoices in question.therefore, the impugned order is set aside. the appeal of the appellants is allowed with consequential relief, as per law.

Full Judgment

1. In this appeal the issue relates to the denial of the Modvat credit of the amount in question to the appellants.

2.The credit has been disallowed to the appellants by the Id.

Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that the dealer took over the business from another person and permission for that taking over was not allowed and as such the dealer could not issue the modvatable documents to the appellants. But in my view this ground is not legally tenable. At the time of issuance of invoices, the dealer was registered dealer. The appellants have received the goods from the dealer under the duty paid valid invoices. The actual receipt of the goods received by them, the duty paid character and utilisation of the goods by the appellants in their factory remains undisputed. There is also nothing on the record to suggest if any, proceedings had been initiated against the dealer. Under these circumstances, the appellants could not be denied the Modvat credit on the basis of the invoices in question.

Therefore, the impugned order is set aside. The appeal of the appellants is allowed with consequential relief, as per law.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial