Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11A

Supreme Court clarifies ‘Transaction Value’ under Central Excise Act: Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (20 January 2025)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11A, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11AC, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 4, Judges, Pankaj Mithal

Supreme Court Clarifies ‘Transaction Value’ under Central Excise Act: Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (2025) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of ‘transaction value’ for excise duty under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, when goods are sold at different prices to different buyers. CASE TYPE: Central Excise Law Case Name: Bharat […]

Supreme Court clarifies ‘Transaction Value’ under Central Excise Act: Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (20 January 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Interest on Delayed Duty Drawback for Deemed Exports: Union of India vs. B.T. Patil (2024)

/ Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11A, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11B, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11BB, Customs Act, 1962, Customs Act, 1962 with Section 27, Customs Act, 1962 with Section 27A, Customs Act, 1962 with Section 75A, Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 with Rule 2(e)

Supreme Court Clarifies Interest on Delayed Duty Drawback for Deemed Exports: Union of India vs. B.T. Patil (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether interest is applicable on delayed duty drawback refunds for deemed exports under the Exim Policy. CASE TYPE: Civil, Foreign Trade Case Name: Union of India and Ors. vs. M/S. B. T. Patil and Sons

Supreme Court Clarifies Interest on Delayed Duty Drawback for Deemed Exports: Union of India vs. B.T. Patil (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles classification of Chewing Tobacco and Zarda for Excise Duty: Commr. Of Cen. Exc. Ahmedabad vs. M/S Urmin Products & Ors. (2023) INSC 951 (20 October 2023)

/ Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11A, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 4A, Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, Classification of Goods, Excise Duty

Supreme Court Clarifies Excise Duty on Chewing Tobacco and Zarda: Urmin Products & Ors. (2023) INSC 951 Date of the Judgment: 20 October 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 951 Judges: S. Ravindra Bhat, J., Aravind Kumar, J. Can a product labeled as “flavored chewing tobacco” be classified differently for excise duty purposes if it contains similar

Supreme Court settles classification of Chewing Tobacco and Zarda for Excise Duty: Commr. Of Cen. Exc. Ahmedabad vs. M/S Urmin Products & Ors. (2023) INSC 951 (20 October 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles recovery of erroneous refunds under Central Excise Act: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. M/s Morarjee Gokuldas Spg. & Wvg. Co. Ltd. (24 March 2023)

/ Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11A, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11B, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 35E, Judges, Krishna Murari, M. R. Shah

Supreme Court clarifies recovery of erroneous refunds under Central Excise Act Date of the Judgment: 24 March 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 254 Judges: M. R. Shah, J. and Krishna Murari, J. Can the tax authorities recover an erroneous refund of excise duty without issuing a separate notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act,

Supreme Court settles recovery of erroneous refunds under Central Excise Act: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. M/s Morarjee Gokuldas Spg. & Wvg. Co. Ltd. (24 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the necessity of Section 11A notice for recovery of erroneous excise duty refunds when reviewed under Section 35E: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Morarjee Gokuldas Spg. & Wvg. Co. Ltd. (24 March 2023)

/ Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11A, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11B, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 35E, Judges, Krishna Murari, M. R. Shah

Supreme Court Clarifies Recovery of Erroneous Excise Duty Refunds: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Morarjee Gokuldas Spg. & Wvg. Co. Ltd. (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a separate notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is required for the recovery of an erroneously refunded excise duty when the refund order is reviewed under

Supreme Court clarifies the necessity of Section 11A notice for recovery of erroneous excise duty refunds when reviewed under Section 35E: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Morarjee Gokuldas Spg. & Wvg. Co. Ltd. (24 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies interest liability on duty for PSU: Steel Authority of India Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur (28 July 2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, Central Excise, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11A, Committee of Disputes, Hima Kohli, Interest on Duty, Judges, Supreme Court Judgments, Tax Law

Steel Authority of India Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur: Supreme Court on Interest on Duty Date of the Judgment: 28 July 2022 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: B.R. Gavai, J. and Hima Kohli, J. Can a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) be liable to pay interest on a duty amount when the matter

Supreme Court clarifies interest liability on duty for PSU: Steel Authority of India Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur (28 July 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies appeal process in Central Excise cases: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. M/s. Krishna Wax (P) Ltd. (2019)

/ Adjudication Process, Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11A, Judges, Show Cause Notice, Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court clarifies appeal process in Central Excise cases: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. M/s. Krishna Wax (P) Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an internal order of the Central Excise Department, determining that it has jurisdiction to proceed with a matter, is appealable before the issuance of a show cause notice. CASE TYPE: Central Excise

Supreme Court clarifies appeal process in Central Excise cases: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. M/s. Krishna Wax (P) Ltd. (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Excise Duty on Marketable Agarbathi Perfume: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Karnataka Soaps & Detergents Ltd. (2017)

/ Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11A, Deepak Gupta, Excise Duty, Judges, Madan B. Lokur, Marketability, S. Abdul Nazeer

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether excise duty is applicable on perfumery compounds used in agarbathi manufacturing, and whether actual marketing is necessary for levying such duty. CASE TYPE: Excise Law Case Name: Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Bangalore vs. M/s Karnataka Soaps & Detergents Ltd. [Judgment Date]: 12 October 2017 Introduction Date of the Judgment:

Supreme Court Upholds Excise Duty on Marketable Agarbathi Perfume: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Karnataka Soaps & Detergents Ltd. (2017) Read Post »

Scroll to Top