Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Central Excise Rules, 1994

6 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, COIMBATORE AND ORS.versusJAWAHAR MILLS LTD. AND ORS.

2001 INSC 32227 July 2001Dismissed

Jawahar Mills Ltd. and other manufacturers claimed Modvat credit for duty paid on items such as power cables, capacitors, control panels, switches and air compressors, treating them as "capital goods" under Explanation to Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Revenue disallowed the claim, but the Customs, Exc

M/S. SHREE BHAGWATI STEEL ROLLING MILLSversusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ANR.

2015 INSC 85524 November 2015Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a batch of appeals filed by M/s Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mills and other assessees against the Commissioner of Central Excise. The core issues were whether Rules 96ZO, 96ZP and 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules could levy interest and a mandatory penalty equal to the duty amount when Secti

COMMISSSIONER, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, AURANGABADversusM/S ROOFIT INDUSTRIES LTD.

2015 INSC 34723 April 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, challenged the CESTAT order that allowed Roofit Industries Ltd. to deduct freight, insurance and unloading charges from the assessable value of its pipe products. The revenue argued that the sale of goods occurred at the buyer's premises, making those charges p

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHIversusM/S. MODI ALKALIES AND CHEMICALS LTD.

2004 INSC 45618 August 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The Commissioner of Central Excise held that Modi Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd. (MACL) had created three front companies to evade excise duty on hydrogen gas, treating them as dummies and imposing duty, penalty and confiscation. The Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) overturned this, finding no in

THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AURANGABADversusM/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD., WALUJ, AURANGABAD, THROUGH ITS VICE PRESIDENT (MATERIALS) AND ORS.

2010 INSC 77512 November 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Commissioner of Central Excise issued a show‑cause notice to M/s. Bajaj Auto Ltd. alleging that it supplied aluminum ingots to M/s. Anurang Engineering at an under‑valued landed cost, thereby evading excise duty on the finished castings. The adjudicating authority held Bajaj liable for duty, penalty and interest, b

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, ALLAHABADversusM/S J.R. ORGANICS LTD.

2023 INSC 1831 March 2023Dismissed

The Commissioner of Central Excise valued specially denatured spirits (SDS) supplied by M/s J.R. Organics Ltd. by taking the highest price of SDS at another unit on a particular date, invoking Rule 6(p)(ii) of the Central Excise Rules, 1994. The assessee challenged this, arguing that the value should be based on the mo

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search