Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Excise duty

UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER ETC. ETC. versus M/S V.V.F LIMITED & ANOTHER ETC. ETC.

The subsequent notifications/industrial policies limiting refund to duty payable on actual value addition were clarificatory in nature, issued under Section 5A of the Central Excise Act in public interest to prevent misuse and tax evasion, did not take away vested rights conferred by earlier notifications, and are therefore not hit by the doctrine of promissory estoppel; the High Courts erred in quashing those notifications and their orders are set aside; pending refund claims to be decided as per the subsequent notifications while already refunded amounts are not reopened.

Source excerpt

  • Promissory estoppel
  • Retrospectivity and clarificatory notifications
  • Value addition basis for refunds
  • Cenvat credit rules, 2001
  • Prevention of tax evasion
Read case analysis
Taxation

M/S. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. versus COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA

Concessional duty rate for kerosene is available only for kerosene cleared to the Public Distribution System for illumination and domestic purposes, not for industrial consumers. Both conditions specified in the notifications are conjunctive and must be fulfilled.

Source excerpt

  • Concessional duty rates
  • Interpretation of notifications
  • Industrial vs. pds clearance
Read case analysis
Excise duty

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE versus M/S. GUJARAT NARMADA VALLEY FERTILIZERS CO. LTD.

Rule 6(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 is plenary; CENVAT credit is not allowed for inputs, including fuel-inputs such as LSHS, used in the manufacture of exempted goods. Credit is permitted only on eligible inputs for electricity used within the factory; no credit for electricity wheeled out/cleared to the grid or township.

Source excerpt

  • Cenvat credit
  • Cenvat credit rules, 2002
  • Rule 6(1)
  • Exempted goods
  • Fuel inputs
Read case analysis
Excise duty

D.C.L. POLYSTER LTD., NAGPUR versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS

Spilled polyester chips do not lose their identity as chips and remain marketable as polyester chips; therefore, they are classifiable under Heading 39.07 as primary forms of plastic and not under Heading 39.15 as waste. Department could invoke extended period of limitation due to the misdeclaration in classification and absence of details regarding emergence of waste at various production stages.

Source excerpt

  • Classification under excise tariff
  • Extended period of limitation
  • Marketability
  • Technical classification vs. common parlance
Read case analysis
Tax law

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. versus TATA IRON & STEEL CO. LTD., JAMSHEDPUR

Exemption under Notification No. 30/60 applies even when duty-paid pig iron is mixed with non-duty-paid materials in manufacture of steel ingots; statutory language does not restrict exemption to cases where only duty-paid pig iron is used.

Source excerpt

  • Exemption from excise duty
  • Interpretation of statutory notifications
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.