Register free! 
Central Excise - Judgement
[ 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 ]  

 
First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next | Last
Documents Found: 3158   
Title Forum  Year
CCE vs Sony Music Entertainment India (P) Ltd. Activity of packing imported CDs in a jewel box whether manufacture-CDs complete and finished when imported, Activities not amounting to manufacture-The high court, on a question whether the activity of packing imported compact discs in a jewel box along with inlay card would amount to manufacture [LexDoc Id : 379909]
HC (Bombay) 2009
Commissioner of Service Tax vs BPL Ltd. [LexDoc Id : 379895]
HC (Karnataka) 2009
CC vs Srinar Electronics (P) Ltd. [LexDoc Id : 386828]
CESTAT (Chennai) 2009
CCE vs Cheran Spinners [LexDoc Id : 385531]
CESTAT (Chennai) 2009
V.V.F. Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 385112]
CESTAT (Ahmedabad) 2009
CCE and C vs Nish Fibres [LexDoc Id : 378285]
HC (Gujarat) 2009
Inductotherm India (P) Ltd. vs UOI and Ors. Exemption from duty: Observations of Commissioner (Appeals)-Order of higher forum available in assessees own case-The high court held that judicial propriety demanded that when there was an order of higher forum available in the assessee’s own case, the same had t [LexDoc Id : 378284]
HC (Gujarat) 2009
Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd., In re [LexDoc Id : 428725]
GOI 2009
Sudha Ramachandran vs UOI Refund application: Return of application not amounting to disposal of application-Interest payable only on amounts ordered to be refunded, Question of payment of refund arising only if application allowed and refund order passed-The return of refund application could not be treated as a disposal of that application under law. The authority concerned had got a duty to consider [LexDoc Id : 421174]
HC (Kerala) 2009
Asstt. Executive Engineer, PCC Poles vs CCE Doctrine of unjust enrichment-Applicability of doctrine even to cases of captive consumption-Doctrine of unjust enrichment was applicable even to cases of captive consumption. [LexDoc Id : 396759]
HC (Punjab and Haryana) 2009
Moenus Textile (P) Ltd. vs CCE and Service Tax [LexDoc Id : 396078]
CESTAT (Delhi) 2009
Amkap Marketing (P) Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 394046]
CESTAT (Delhi) 2009
CCE vs Deys Medical (P) Ltd. [LexDoc Id : 389689]
CESTAT (Delhi) 2009
Gujarat Borosil Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 389677]
CESTAT (Ahmedabad) 2009
Navabharat Ferro Alloys Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 387217]
CESTAT (Bangalore) 2009
Khatri Kimam Co. (P) Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 387026]
CESTAT (Delhi) 2009
Suzlon Structures (P) Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 387017]
CESTAT (Ahmedabad) 2009
Reliance Industries Ltd. and Reliance Communication Infrastructure Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 378881]
CESTAT (Ahmedabad) 2009
Assistant Executive Engineer vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 378465]
HC (Punjab and Haryana) 2009
Paharpur Plastics vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 420975]
CESTAT (Delhi) 2009
P. and G. Hygiene and Health Care Ltd. vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax [LexDoc Id : 402156]
HC (Kerala) 2009
CCE and C vs Millars India Ltd. [LexDoc Id : 397129]
CESTAT (Ahmedabad) 2009
Mordi Textiles and Processors Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 395336]
CESTAT (Delhi) 2009
Simplex Steel Industries vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 395317]
HC (Punjab and Haryana) 2009
CCE vs Freeman Measure (P) Ltd. Default in discharging monthly excise duty liability: Amount due paid just after 30 days and within two months for each respective instance-Forfeiture of facility to pay the dues in monthly instalments for a period of two months, Two months period to necessarily run concurrently since order for each instance being a common order-The respondent had defaulted in discharging the monthly excise duty liability. Five different show cause notices were issued alleging contravention of [LexDoc Id : 391427]
HC (Punjab and Haryana) 2009
 
First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next | Last