Section 3621 - Judgment Search Results

Uni Socks (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

to pay whole of the duty of excise leviable under section 3 of the central excise act 2 the appellant s

Sunder Silk Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in: (2006)(111)ECC582

be charged on these shortages as applicable with interest under section 11 a and no penalty is warranted 2 learned counsel

P.M. Telelinks Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in: (2006)(111)ECC404

11 2005 dismissed the appeal in terms of provisions of section 35f of the central excise act 1944 for non depositing

Andhra Cylinders Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in: (2006)(111)ECC375

in the order extracted supra the time limit prescribed in section 11b of the ce act is not applicable learned commissioner

Prima Pick N. Pack Limited Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

unjust enrichment based on equity thus irrespective of applicability of section 11b of the central excise act doctrine can be invoked

Krishi Industrial Corporation Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in: (2006)(113)ECC14

case and demanded duty of rs 3 51 569 under section 11a of central excise act 1944 further he imposed penalty

Birla Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2007)(209)ELT48TriDel

within the time limit of 60 days as provided under section 35 of the central excise act 1944 further the delay

Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

for quantification of duty after grant of such abatement under section 4 4 d ii of the central excise act in

Anil Dang and Multiflex Lami Print Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

customers is covered under the expression incidental to manufacture under section 2 f iv that since the appellants did not obtain

Bharat Electronics Limited Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

goods under under tion no ing no or the the sec sub first ond heading sched sched no ule ule 1