Calcutta High Court Quashes Ex Parte Order Imposing Excise Duty On Incineration Of Lean Gas Used In Generation Of Electricity

The Calcutta High Court has quashed the ex parte order imposing excise duty on the incineration of lean gas used in the generation of electricity.The bench of Justice Md. Nizamuddin has remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority concerned to pass a fresh adjudication order by allowing the petitioner to file an objection against the adjudication order by treating it as show cause notice and to take all the points raised in this writ petition.The issue raised was whether lean gas or...

Supreme Court Affirms Penalty On 'Zarda' Manufacturers For Misclassifying Product As 'Chewing Tobacco' For Central Excise Duty

The Supreme Court while adjudicating a matter wherein the Assesssee deliberately misclassified the ‘Zarda’ produced by it as ‘Chewing Tobacco’ for evading payment of a high duty as applicable to ‘Zarda’, has affirmed the imposition of penalty and demand for payment of differential duty raised by the Central Excise Department from the Assessee.The Bench comprising Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar, has held that, “The assessee being aware that there being no change in the nature...

Delhi High Court Directs Adjudicating Authority To Process Blackberry’s Claim Of Interest Under Section 11BB Of The Excise Act

The Delhi High Court has directed the adjudicating authority to process Blackberry’s claim of interest under Section 11BB of the Excise Act.The bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Amit Mahajan has observed that there is no cavill that the petitioner would be entitled to interest in terms of Section 11BB of the Excise Act from the date immediately after the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of an application for a refund if it is not processed within the said period of three...

Excise Act | Meghalaya High Court Upholds Order Granting Interest To Assessee On Refund Of Deposit Made 'Under Protest' During Investigation

The Meghalaya High Court on Wednesday upheld the order passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) granting interest on the delayed refund of a deposit made by the assessee under protest, during investigation for allegedly claiming excess cenvat credit.Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice W. Diengdoh observed that Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 which bars payment of interest for refund of duty or interest will not be attracted to this case...

Mere Pendency Of An Appeal Would Not Detract From The Excise Duty Refund Demand: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the mere pendency of an appeal or an order of stay that may operate would not detract from the obligation of any person claiming a refund to make an application within the period prescribed and computed with reference to the "relevant date"."We do so observe in light of the indubitable principle that an order of stay that may operate in an appeal does not efface the demand or the obligation of refund that may have sprung into existence. It merely places the...

Self-Assessment Of Assessee Not Rendered Malafide Merely Because It Was Based On A CETSTAT View Which Was Later Overturned : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Ahmedabad bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) by holding the demand for differential excise duty raised against the assessee, M/s Reliance Industries Ltd, as time barred.The court dismissed the contention that Reliance had deliberately suppressed and withheld material information and documents from the departmental officers by not filing the same and thus, the ground for invoking the extended period of...

Excise Commissioner Is Duty Bound To Cancel Liquor Licence On The Application Of Legal Heirs Of The Deceased: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court, Goa Bench has held that when the legal heirs of the deceased license holder applied for cancellation, the excise commissioner was duty-bound to cancel it.The bench of Justice Bharat P. Deshpande has observed that the transfer of liquor licenses is at the discretion of the concerned authority.The petitioner challenged the order passed by the Commissioner of Excise, who canceled the liquor license for the retail sale of IMFL and CL for consumption standing in the name of the...

Mere Broad-Basing Of Entries Under Central Excise Tariff Act, Cannot Justify Re-Classification, Without Change In Nature, Character Or Use Of The Product: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has ruled that the classification of a product under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, cannot be changed merely on the ground of change of tax structure or tariff entries, without showing a change in the nature and character of a product or a change in the use of the product(Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Hyderabad vs Ashwani Homeo Pharmacy).The bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwar and Vikram Nath was dealing with an appeal against the decision of the...

Central Excise Act- No Separate Notice Necessary For Recovery Of Erroneous Refund Granted: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that no separate notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act is necessary for the recovery of an erroneous refund granted.The division bench of Justice M. R. Shah and Justice Krishna Murari has observed that once the order originally sanctioning the refund came to be set aside, there was no question of any further notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act.The issue raised was whether the separate notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act is...

Central Excise Act - To Be "Related Person", Buyer & Seller Must Have Direct Or Indirect Interest In Each Other’s Business : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court while ascertaining who is the “Related Party” under the Central Excise Act for the purpose of valuation held that before the clause in Section 4(4)(c) could be used, the buyer and seller had to be interested in one another's businesses. Since two-way traffic is required, there shouldn't be any one-way traffic.The division bench of Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Dipankar Datta referred to various precedents which explained that Section 4(4)(c) defines “related person”...

Only Retail Sale Can Claim Assessment Benefits Under Section 4A Of Central Excise Act : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that mere affixation of MRP does not make goods eligible for central excise duty exemption, and what is required along with the affixation is a mandate of law that directs the seller to affix such MRP.The Division Bench of Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia has observed that where the purchaser institution is deemed to not be a consumer, the sale also cannot be held to be a retail sale as per the Act. Since the sale was not a retail sale, there is no...