COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE BELGAUM vs M/S. VASAVADATTA CEMENTS LTD. — C.A. No. 11710/2016

Case under Section XII-B. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010070242011

Filing Date

01-Mar-2011

Registration No

C.A. No. 11710/2016

Diary Number

7024/2011

Order Date

17-Jan-2018

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Neutral Citation

2018 INSC 30

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Last updated 03-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section XII-B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE BELGAUM

    Adv. B. KRISHNA PRASAD

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.M/S. VASAVADATTA CEMENTS LTD.

    Adv. KHAITAN & CO.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Jan-2018

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 17-Jan-2018

    Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 17-Jan-2018

    Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan

  5. 16-Jan-2018

    Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan

  6. 13-Dec-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 13-Dec-2017

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 15-Nov-2016
  9. 15-Nov-2016
  10. 28-Oct-2016
  11. 28-Oct-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  12. 28-Oct-2016
  13. 10-Aug-2016
  14. 10-Aug-2016
  15. 11-Jul-2016
  16. 11-Jul-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  17. 11-Jul-2016
  18. 01-Jul-2016
  19. 01-Jul-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  20. 01-Jul-2016
  21. 30-Jun-2016
  22. 30-Jun-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  23. 30-Jun-2016
  24. 11-May-2016
  25. 11-May-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  26. 11-May-2016
  27. 10-May-2016
  28. 10-May-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  29. 10-May-2016
  30. 18-Apr-2016
  31. 18-Apr-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  32. 18-Apr-2016
  33. 01-Feb-2016
  34. 01-Feb-2016
  35. 30-Nov-2015
  36. 30-Nov-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  37. 30-Nov-2015
  38. 10-Sep-2015
  39. 10-Sep-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  40. 10-Sep-2015
  41. 28-Aug-2015
  42. 28-Aug-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  43. 28-Aug-2015
  44. 08-Jul-2015
  45. 08-Jul-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  46. 08-Jul-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  47. 08-Jul-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  48. 08-Jul-2015
  49. 09-Feb-2015
  50. 09-Feb-2015
  51. 22-Jan-2015
  52. 19-Jan-2015
  53. 19-Jan-2015
  54. 18-Dec-2014
  55. 18-Dec-2014
  56. 07-Nov-2014
  57. 07-Nov-2014
  58. 03-Nov-2014
  59. 03-Nov-2014

    Office ReportView PDF

  60. 03-Nov-2014
  61. 19-Sep-2014
  62. 19-Sep-2014
  63. 13-Aug-2014
  64. 08-Aug-2014

    Office ReportView PDF

  65. 08-Aug-2014
  66. 04-Aug-2014

    Office ReportView PDF

  67. 30-Jun-2014
  68. 24-Apr-2014
  69. 29-Jan-2014
  70. 16-Dec-2013
  71. 29-Nov-2013

    Office ReportView PDF

  72. 29-Nov-2013
  73. 19-Sep-2013
  74. 31-Jul-2013
  75. 12-Jul-2013
  76. 02-May-2013
  77. 01-May-2013
  78. 25-Apr-2013
  79. 15-Apr-2013
  80. 12-Mar-2013
  81. 27-Feb-2013
  82. 24-Jan-2013
  83. 14-Jan-2013
  84. 27-Nov-2012
  85. 01-Oct-2012
  86. 22-Aug-2012
  87. 02-Apr-2012
  88. 19-Mar-2012
  89. 31-Jan-2012
  90. 09-Jan-2012
  91. 14-Dec-2011
  92. 02-Dec-2011
  93. 02-Dec-2011
  94. 25-Nov-2011
  95. 11-Nov-2011
  96. 30-Sep-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  97. 30-Sep-2011
  98. 29-Jul-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  99. 15-Apr-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  100. 04-Apr-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  101. 01-Apr-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  102. 01-Mar-2011

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 11710/2016

  103. [ 2018 INSC 30 ]

    Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of C.A. No. 11710/2016 The Supreme Court dismissed appeals by the Commissioner of Central Excise challenging CESTAT's decision allowing CENVAT credit on goods transport agency services for product transportation from manufacturing place to depots or customer premises. The Court upheld that "clearance of final products from the place of removal" under CENVAT Rules 2004 includes transportation charges to the first destination point, supporting this interpretation through a 2008 rule amendment that changed "from" to "upto" the place of removal, confirming legislature's intent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case