Chennai Court May 2010 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
M/S. Jsw Steel Ltd. Vs. Cce, Salem
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-10-2010
Per: Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy Heard both sides. The impugned Show Cause Notice alleges that the appellants used runner mass falling under Chapter 38 in the blast furnace for conveying molten metal from the blast furnace. The appellants have taken credit of duty paid on runner mass as inputs. It is the case of the department that the runner mass is part of the blast furnace and hence capital goods, consequently, the authorities below have held that the appellants should have taken 50% of the credit in the first year and the balance 50% in the second year. 2. Even assuming that the department’s case is valid, the appellants should be entitled to the full amount of credit but only with a time lag of one year. Hence, there cannot be a net demand on the appellants. We, therefore, find that the demand of duty confirmed by the authorities below against the appellants is prima facie not sustainable. Hence, we waive the requirement of predeposit during the pendency of the appeal and sta...
M/S. Sri Jayajothi Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce, Tirunelveli
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-07-2010
Heard both sides. The authorities below had appropriated an amount of Rs.1,15,843/- out of the refund due to the appellants on 14.3.2005 against another demand which was the subject-matter of a separate appeal No. E/102/2004. That appeal has since been decided in favour of the appellants vide Final Order No. 936/2005 dated 6.7.2005. As such, the amount appropriated is refundable to the appellants since the demand against which the appropriation was made has been set aside by the Tribunal. The impugned order upholding the appropriation is therefore set aside with consequential relief to the appellants. The appeal is allowed....
Commissioner of Central Excise, Pondicherry Vs. M/S.Atlanta
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-07-2010
The respondents herein are holders of service tax registration and are rendering Consulting Engineer’s Service. A show-cause notice was issued to them proposing levy of service tax on amount collected towards construction and soil testing Services. Demand of Rs.3,27,253/- was confirmed together with interest and penalty was also imposed. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand but set aside the penalty; the Tribunal vide its Final Order No.948-949/04 dated 27.10.2004, remanded the case for working out the tax liability after holding that amount collected by the Consulting Engineer towards cost of construction of a building cannot be brought within the purview of advice, consultancy or technical assistance and holding that soil test fee is includible in the amount to be taxed. The adjudicating authority passed the order after remand by which he confirmed an amount of Rs.1,13,324/- with interest and imposed a penalty of equal amount. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the inclu...
M/S. Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. Vs. Cce, Trichy
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-07-2010
Heard both sides. This appeal was kept pending in view of the pendency of the Larger Bench decision in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. and Ors. Vs. CCE, Raipur and Ors. In view of the fact that the Larger Bench decision in the said case is since available vide Misc. Order No. 296/2010-EX(LB) dated 30.4.2010, holding that credit of duty in respect of goods like cement and steel items used for laying foundation and building supporting structures is not available, the present appeal is dismissed applying the ratio of the said Larger Bench....
M/S.State Bank of India Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-07-2010
The appeal is dismissed for want of CoD clearance with liberty to apply for restoration as and when clearance is granted....
Cce, Trichy Vs. M/S. Chettinadu Cement Corporation Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-07-2010
Heard both sides. The learned SDR Shri T.H. Rao states that this case is covered in Department’s favour in the light of the Larger Bench decision in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. and Ors. Vs. CCE, Raipur and Ors. vide Misc. Order No. 296/2010-EX(LB) dated 30.4.2010 since the respondents have used the impugned steel items for building supporting structures. Shri R. Parthasarathy, learned consultant, appearing for the respondents states that the actual use of the steel items requires detailed verification according to him some of the steel plates were also used for machinery parts. Considering the arguments from both sides and with the consent of both sides, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remanded to the original authority for a fresh decision in the light of the ratio of the Larger Bench decision in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. (cited supra). The respondents should be allowed a reasonable opportunity of hearing before passing a fresh order. The Department...
Commissioner of Customs, Trichy Vs. M/S.Lakshmi and Co.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-07-2010
On hearing learned SDR and perusing the records (none appears for the respondents in spite of notice), I find that connected appeals filed by the Revenue against quantum of fine and penalty imposed upon the respondents were dismissed vide Final Order No.123 to 125/10 dated 22.01.2010. Following the same ratio in this appeal against the common impugned order, I uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal filed against the present respondents....
M/S.K.M.B. Granites (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Trich ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-07-2010
Demand of service tax of Rs.52,064/- together with interest and penalties imposed under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 on the ground that the assessee was a recipient of Goods Transport Agency service, is contested by the assessees on the ground that they have availed services only from individual truck/lorry owners who are not liable to tax. 2. I have heard both sides. Although the assessees submit that they had filed vouchers before the lower appellate authority to support their contention that services were received by them only from individual truck/lorry owners, there is nothing to establish that such vouchers were filed before the Commissioner (Appeals). The lower appellate authority has recorded that the assessees did not submit any documents to support the above contention. I find that in the case of the same assessees, the demand has been set aside by accepting that services were provided by individual truck/lorry owners as seen from Final Order No.89,90/10 d...
Cce, Chennai Vs. M/S. India Pistons Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-07-2010
Heard both sides. Shri T.H. Rao, learned SDR fairly states that a similar issue has been decided by the Tribunal in favour of the respondents vide Final Order No. 475/2010 dated 26.4.2010 in Appeal No. E/362/2009. Accordingly, applying the ratio of the said decision, the Department s appeal is dismissed....
Cce, Chennai Vs. M/S. Hyundai Motor India Ltd. and Another
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: May-06-2010
Per: Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy Heard both sides. The adjudicating Commissioner has dropped the proceedings initiated under the impugned Show Cause Notice taking note of the fact that the assessments were provisional and the respondents have paid the demanded duty amount on finalization of the assessment. The department has come in appeal on the ground that the assessment was provisional on another ground which is not relatable to wrong availment of cenvat credit which is the issue under the impugned show cause notice. 2. We find from the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Serai Kella Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Patna 1997 (91) ELT 497 (S.C.) and CCE and C, Mumbai Vs. ITC Ltd. 2006 (203) ELT 532 (S.C.) that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that finalization of the provisional assessment is sine qua non for issuance of notice under Section 11A as power under Section 11A is invokable only when duty not levied or not paid or short-levied or short-paid a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »