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.

Forge India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Forge India Ltd. vs Commissioner of C. Ex.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Jan 23, 2008
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/46879

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
Service Tax

Case Summary

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

Service Tax

Key legal issue
Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Forge India Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of C. Ex.

Legal References

Reported In
(2008)10STR489

Excerpt

1. in terms of the impugned order, the appellant is required to deposit the duty of rs. 1,44,213/- and equal penalty. the period of dispute is from 1-1-05 to 31-12-05. the issue is whether cenvat credit can be taken in respect of service tax on outward transportation. the learned counsel relied on board's circular no. 97/8/2007-s.t. dated 23-8-07 wherein the matter is clarified. the learned dr has stated that the appellant has not given proper evidence for incurring expenditure on outward transportation till the date of delivery.2. however, the learned advocate countered the argument stating that evidence nad been produced but the learned commissioner (appeals) has not taken them into account.3. on a very careful consideration of the issue, prima facie, the appellants have a strong case in favour in view of the board's circular. therefore, we order full waiver of tax demanded and also penalty imposed till the disposal of appeal.

Full Judgment

1. In terms of the impugned order, the appellant is required to deposit the duty of Rs. 1,44,213/- and equal penalty. The period of dispute is from 1-1-05 to 31-12-05. The issue is whether Cenvat credit can be taken in respect of service tax on outward transportation. The learned Counsel relied on Board's Circular No. 97/8/2007-S.T. dated 23-8-07 wherein the matter is clarified. The learned DR has stated that the appellant has not given proper evidence for incurring expenditure on outward transportation till the date of delivery.

2. However, the learned Advocate countered the argument stating that evidence nad been produced but the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not taken them into account.

3. On a very careful consideration of the issue, prima facie, the appellants have a strong case in favour in view of the Board's circular. Therefore, we order full waiver of tax demanded and also penalty imposed till the disposal of appeal.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial