The Commissioner, GST (East), CR Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi Versus M\/s. Unitech Containers Pvt. Ltd.
Central Excise
2017 (8) TMI 1171 – DELHI HIGH COURT – 2017 (358) E.L.T. 99 (Del.)
DELHI HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 11-8-2017
CEAC No. 22\/2017 & CM APPL 28676\/2017
Central Excise
S. MURALIDHAR & PRATHIBA M. SINGH JJ.
\nAppellant Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Namrata Bharti, Advocate
\nRespondent Through: None
\nO R D E R
\n1. This appeal by the Commissioner, GST Delhi (East), New Delhi ('Department') under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ('CE Act') is directed against a common final order dated 17th February, 2017 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ('<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n spondent and three of its directors, no SCN was issued to the dummy units. The demand raised in the SCN was confirmed by the impugned order of the CCE dated 27th February, 2009. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Commissioner, GST (East), CR Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi Versus M\/s. Unitech Containers Pvt. Ltd.Central Excise2017 (8) TMI 1171 – DELHI HIGH COURT – 2017 (358) E.L.T. 99 (Del.)DELHI HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 11-8-2017CEAC No. 22\/2017 & CM APPL 28676\/2017 Central ExciseS. MURALIDHAR & PRATHIBA M. SINGH JJ. Appellant Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior … Continue reading “The Commissioner, GST (East), CR Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi Versus M\/s. Unitech Containers Pvt. Ltd.”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7481","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7481","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=7481"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7481\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=7481"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=7481"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=7481"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. One of the points urged by the Respondent before the CESTAT was that the turnover of the four dummy units i.e. Unichem Engineering (P) Ltd., Anant Packaging, Akriti Packaging and Universal Offsets, was sought to be added to the turnover of the Respondent to arrive at the eligible amount for the 'Small Scale Industry' exemption. It was claimed that each of the four units have independent existence as private limited companies or partnerships. Two of them were stated to be existing even prior to the incorporation of the Respondent. It is argued that, without issui<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n