Mere Excise Registration Lapse Not Wilful Suppression If Dept. Knew About Unit: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 25 September held that the extended five-year limitation period under the proviso to Section 11-A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 cannot be invoked merely because a manufacturer failed to register or produce declarations, where the department already knew about his manufacturing unit and the goods manufactured there. Justice Irshad Ali quashed the demand of Rs.6,27,086/- in Additional Excise Duty and the equivalent penalty imposed on Siraj Ahmad, proprietor of...

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Revenue Appeal Against Microsoft India In CENVAT Refund Case

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed the Revenue's appeal against a tribunal order holding that Microsoft India (R&D) Pvt. Ltd. was entitled to a cash refund of accumulated CENVAT credit on services provided to its overseas entities. A Division Bench of Justice R. Devdas and Justice K. Manmadha Rao was hearing the appeal against the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal's (CESTAT) December 9, 2024 order. The tribunal had held that the services provided by Microsoft India to...

Karnataka High Court Says Appeal Against CESTAT Order On GTA Classification Lies Before Supreme Court

The Karnataka High Court on 24 September held that an appeal against an order of a Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) on the classification and taxability of services as “Goods Transport Agency” (GTA) service lies before the Supreme Court under Section 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and not before the High Court under Section 35G. A Division Bench comprising Justices R. Devdas and K. Manmadha Rao dismissed the Central Excise Appeal filed by the Commissioner of...

Madras High Court Directs Refund Of ₹6.41 Lakh To The Madras Club, Says Tax Burden Not Passed On Members

The Madras High Court on 1 September directed the authorities to refund Rs.6.41 lakh to The Madras Club, after finding that the club had not passed on the tax burden to its members to that extent. A Division Bench of Justices Anita Sumanth and C. Kumarappan partly allowed the club's appeal against a CESTAT order rejecting its refund claim. The judges held: “...in respect of the portion of the amount in a sum of Rs.9,09,717/-, the appellant has already passed on the burden to its members....

Gauhati High Court Directs Refund Of Cess Paid Under Mistake Of Law By Oil India And ONGC

The Gauhati High Court on 27 August held that the Central Excise Department cannot retain Education Cess (EC) and Secondary & Higher Education Cess (SHEC) paid under a mistake of law merely because the refund claim was filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. A Division Bench comprising Justices Michael Zothankhuma and Anjan Moni Kalita dismissed appeals filed by the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Dibrugarh, in matters concerning Oil India Limited and Oil and Natural Gas...

Karnataka High Court Upholds Adjustment Of Excess Excise Duty Payment Towards Dues Of Another Firm

The Karnataka High Court has upheld the adjustment of an excess excise duty payment made towards the dues of one firm against the outstanding liability of another firm under the State's Karasamadhana-IV Scheme.A Division Bench comprising Justice Lalitha Kanneganti and Justice K.S. Hemalekha dismissed the State's appeal against the order of the Single Judge directing the authorities to adjust the excess amount of ₹43.23 lakh paid towards the liability of Nagalingaswami Trading Company (NTC)...

Service Tax | Madras High Court Says Refund Cannot Be Denied For Tax Paid Under Mistake Of Law

The Madras High Court has dismissed the Revenue's appeal against an order granting a refund of service tax paid on the supply of floating rigs, holding that the tax had been collected under an erroneous classification and could not be retained by the Government.A Division Bench comprising Dr. Justice G. Jayachandran and Justice N. Mala held that where service tax was paid due to a mistake of law, the Department could not deny a refund merely by relying on the limitation prescribed under...

CESTAT Must Issue Fresh Notice If Bench Does Not Sit On Fixed Hearing Date: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has recently held that where no bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal sits on the date fixed for hearing so that no judicial order comes to be passed fixing the next date, the Tribunal must issue a fresh notice to the party intimating the next date and place of hearing. It held that an appeal decided ex parte on such an unnotified date is decided without affording the appellant due opportunity of hearing. Rule 18(1) of the Customs,...

CESTAT Must Decide All Issues As Final Fact-Finding Authority: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has recently observed that the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), as the final fact-finding authority under the statute, must adjudicate all issues arising from the record. Failure to consider a contention and render a finding on it amounts to failure to exercise jurisdiction, the court observed.“The CESTAT, being the final fact-finding authority under the statute, was duty bound to adjudicate on all issues arising from the record. Its failure to...

Calcutta HC Rejects ₹27.74 Cr CENVAT Demand, Says Revenue Cannot Choose Assessee's Compliance Method

The Calcutta High Court has recently dismissed the Revenue's appeals against a biscuit manufacturer in a Rs 27.74 crore CENVAT credit dispute involving the manufacture of both dutiable and exempted biscuits.It held that an assessee has the right to choose between the methods of compliance available under Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules.A Division Bench of Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj and Justice Uday Kumar held that the Revenue cannot switch an assessee to a more punitive method merely...

No Excise Duty On Liquor Destroyed In Accidental Fire Without Negligence: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on 4 August held that excise duty cannot be levied on foreign liquor destroyed in an accidental fire where the loss occurred due to an unavoidable cause and there is no evidence of negligence or deliberate wrongdoing by the licensee.A Single Judge Bench of Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke dismissed the State's writ petition and upheld the Board of Revenue's order setting aside the Rs. 38.41 lakh excise duty demand, finding that the factual conclusions were supported by...

Xerox's 'Kitting' Of Imported Photocopier Modules Is Not 'Manufacture': Supreme Court Upholds CESTAT Ruling

The Supreme Court has held that Xerox India's practice of grouping, plugging and pinning imported photocopier modules according to customers' requirements, commonly known as "kitting", did not amount to "manufacture" under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. As no manufacturing activity was found, the company was not liable to pay central excise duty. The court reiterated that a process amounts to manufacture only if it results in a new product with a distinct name, character, and...