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.

Cce, Chennai Vs. M/S. Indian TerraIn Clothing (P) Ltd.

Cce, Chennai vs M/S. Indian TerraIn Clothing (P) Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai Decided Mar 24, 2010
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/944310

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 Chennai
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
E/131 of 2004 and E/CO/75 of 2004
Subject
MRTP

Case Summary

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

MRTP

Key legal issue
MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cce, Chennai

Advocate Shri T.H. Rao, SDR for the Appellant. Shri M. Karthikeyan, Consultant for the Respondents.

Respondent

M/S. Indian TerraIn Clothing (P) Ltd.

Excerpt

per dr. chittaranjan satapathy heard both sides. considering the fact that the period in dispute in this case is the initial period of one month during which the appellants exceeded the small scale exemption limit for the readymade garments, the decision taken by the lower appellate authority to allow refund equal to deemed credit of 20% against the full payment made by the appellants appears to be reasonable. hence we are of the view that the same does not require any interference. consequently, we reject the appeal filed by the department. the cross-objection also stands disposed of.

Full Judgment

Per Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy

Heard both sides. Considering the fact that the period in dispute in this case is the initial period of one month during which the appellants exceeded the small scale exemption limit for the readymade garments, the decision taken by the lower appellate authority to allow refund equal to deemed credit of 20% against the full payment made by the appellants appears to be reasonable. Hence we are of the view that the same does not require any interference. Consequently, we reject the appeal filed by the Department. The cross-objection also stands disposed of.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial