When there is no specific provision prohibiting restoration of an appeal which has been dismissed on the ground of non-deposit of the amount, the Tribunal has power and jurisdiction to recall its order of dismissal, if the ends of justice require such action - Classic Builders Pvt Ltd Vs CESTAT - 2016 TIOL 465 HC MAD ST.
Assesse not making payment of 50% as per requirement of VCES scheme is liable for proceedings under Sections 87,89 and 91 of Finance Act 1994 - CST Vs. Parijat Vyapaar Private Limited - 2016 TIOL 426 HC KOL ST.
Collecting service tax and not depositing per se constitutes an evasion, and therefore the fact of payment of tax with interest before show cause notice is not a valid reason for dropping penalty under section 78 - IWI Crogenic Vaporisation System Pvt Ltd Vs. CCE - 2016 TIOL 350 HC AHM ST.
Passing Final Order merely referring to the paragraphs of the Interim Order is not a speaking order - CST Vs. Kyocera Wireless India Pvt Ltd - 2016 TIOL 321 HC KAR ST.
High Court directs to take appropriate decision in a matter where assesse was denied benefit of VCES scheme due to bonafide mistake in computation of first instalment 50% of service tax which was rectified with second instalment - Navodaya Consultants Ltd Vs.Asst. Commr, Designated Authority - 2016 41 STR 607 (Cal.)
When the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the Rules framed thereunder, permit the adjustment of CENVAT Credit, and when the CENVAT Credit is granted there is no outstanding duty payable, the question of payment of interest and penalty for delayed payment of duty does not arise -Shah Yarn Tex (P) Ltd Vs. Commr (Appeals) - 2016 TIOL 351 HC MAD CX.
Putting together one bought out item with own manufactured item in same carton does not amount to manufacture under Section 2 (f) of Central Excise Act -CCE Vs. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd - 2016 332 ELT 222 (All.)
When a manufacturer has two divisions engaged in production of excisable commodities, clearance from both to be clubbed for claiming SSI exemption despite the fact that separate excise registration exists for each unit - Premium Suiting Pvt Ltd Vs. CCE 2016 TIOL 420 HC ALL CX.
Purchaser of assets in auction of defaulting company is not liable for arrears of defaulter under Section 11 as said section applies only when business of defaulter is taken as a whole -Shreejikrupa Spinners Pvt Ltd Vs. UOI - 2016 332 ELT 601 (Guj.)
When an assesse is entitled for availing credit under Rule 57A, same cannot be denied for reasons as delayed entry in Part II of RG 23A, mistake in making entry etc -Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd Vs. CCE - 2016 332 ELT 411 (M.P.)
Restriction imposed on utilisation of credit of Additional duty of Excise on Goods of Special importance paid during period 01.04.1996 to 01.04.2000 for payment of Excise duty and allowing such utilisation in respect of duties paid after 01.04.2000 is not violative of Article 14 of Constitution - CEAT Ltd Vs. UOI - 2016 332 ELT 481 (Bom.)