COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX vs. M/S ELEGANT DEVELOPERS

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as made applicable to Service Tax matters by Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. A. BRIEF FACTS 5. Succinctly stated, the facts relevant and essential for disposal of these appeals are noted hereinbelow. 6. The respondent, a partnership firm which was engaged in business of purchasing, selling, developing, and dealing

COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI vs. M/S. ALLIED PHOTOGRAPHICS INDIA LTD

Appeal stands allowed

B of the Central Excise Act 1944? FACTS: New India Industries Ltd. (NIIL) is incorporated under the Companies Act 1956 and carries on business of manufacturing photographic printing paper which became chargeable to excise duty vide tariff item No. 37- C(2) of the Central Excise Act 1944 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") with effect from March 1

COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NAGPUR vs. M/S. BALLARPUR INDUSTRIES LTD

1 of 7 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 1373 of 2002 PETITIONER: Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur RESPONDENT: M/s Ballarpur Industries Ltd DATE OF JUDGMENT: 30/08/2007 BENCH: S. H. Kapadia & B. Sudershan Reddy JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T KAPADIA, J. This civil appeal is filed by the Department under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise

COMMNR.,CUSTOMS & CENT.EXCISE AURANGABAD vs. M/S. ROOFIT INDUSTRIES LTD

Appeal is allowed restoring the order passed by the Adjudicating

35L(b) of the Act. 6) The respondent has been duly served in the appeal. However, nobody has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent. Matter came up for final arguments on 10.04.2015. On that day, we heard learned counsel for the appellant for some time as the 1 2002 (146) ELT 31 (SC) = (2003) 1 SCC 281 Civil Appeal

COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX DELHI vs. QUICK HEAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED

In the result, the appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

35L(b) of the Act 1944. 13. The revenue has in its memorandum of appeal formulated the following questions of law for consideration of this Court:­ 6 “(i) Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that the transaction in the present case results in the right to use the software and would amount deemed sale? (ii) Whether the Antivirus Software

M/S DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL vs. COMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI

transferred the compound (kimam). The said enquiries indicated receipt of the said compound (kimam) in balties at Barotiwala during the period 16.2.1995 to 20.12.1996. Based on the above investigations carried out by the department, it appeared that the compound (kimam) was excisable and had been manufactured and cleared without http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 8 obtaining

COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR vs. M/S. SUPER SYNOTEX (INDIA) LTD.

In the result, both sets of appeals stand disposed of

35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for brevity, the Act) being inter- connected and inter-linked was heard together and is disposed of by a common judgment. It is necessary to clarify that the Revenue has preferred the appeals against the decisions rendered by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal”) at various Benches whereby

M/S MATSUSHITA TELEVISION &AUDIO (I)LTD vs. COMMNR. OF CUSTOMS

1 of 7 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 526 of 2002 PETITIONER: M/s. Matsushita Television & Audio (I) Ltd RESPONDENT: Commissioner of Customs DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12/04/2007 BENCH: S.H. KAPADIA & B. SUDERSHAN REDDY JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T KAPADIA, J. This civil appeal under Section 35L(B) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, is directed against the Order

M/S. MODIPON FIBRE COMPANY vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUT

B. Sudershan Reddy JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8529-8531 OF 2001 with Civil Appeal Nos. 2008-2010 of 2002 KAPADIA, J. Delay condoned. 2. These cross appeals are filed by M/s Modipon Fibre Company and the Department under Section 35L of Central Excise Act, 1944 against order dated 3.7.2001 passed

D.C.L. POLYESTER LTD., NAGPUR vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS

In the result, civil appeal is dismissed, with no order as to

1 of 11 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 6559 of 1999 PETITIONER: DCL Polyester Ltd., Nagpur RESPONDENT: Collector of Central Excise & Customs, Nagpur. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 22/02/2005 BENCH: ARIJIT PASAYAT & S.H. KAPADIA JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T KAPADIA, J. The issue which arises for determination in this civil appeal filed by the assessee under section 35L(b