CESTAT Kolkata

Section 35F do not bar Pre-Deposit out of CENVAT Credit Account

M/s.Manaksia Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Haldia (CESTAT Kolkata)

In view of the above observations, the view taken by the First Appellate Authority, that deposit under Section 35F (i) cannot be made from CENVAT Credit Account, is not the correct appreciation of law so long as the CENVAT Credit is permissible for utilisation as per Rule 3(4) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Accordingly, appeal filed ...

Read More

Canteen, House keeping & cleaning service- CENVAT credit allowed

M/S. Tata Steel Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise & Service Tax, Jamshedur (Cestat Kolkata)

CENVAT Credit on Canteen Services and House Keeping/Cleaning Services availed in office building are admissible to Assessee when same was situated within licensed factory premises of Assessee....

Read More

Every audit objection doesn’t lead to invocation of extended period and levy of penalty

LANDIS + GYR LTD. V. Commissioner of Central Excise (Kolkata – CESTAT)

The Hon’ble CESTAT held that every shortcoming noticed during Audit cannot be held as due to mala fide intention on part of Assessee so as to invoke extended period of limitation and levy the penalty. ...

Read More

Intent to evade payment duty is a sina qua non for invoking penal provision u/s. 11AC

Landis + Gyr Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)

Undisputedly the appellant had received input services viz. GTA and Business Auxiliary Service and used the same in or in relation to the manufacture and trading of Electric Meters. It is also not in dispute that credit of Rs. 3,41,397/- availed by the appellant on the said input services were not exclusively used in or in relation to the...

Read More

Rule 3(5) of Cenvat Credit Rules not applicable to credit availed on input services

Seven Star Steels Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax (CESTAT Kolkata)

Appellants had procured iron ores during the period April 2007 to March, 2009, which were used in the manufacture of their final product, namely, sponge iron. In bringing the said iron ores, which were used as input, the appellants had paid service tax on GTA services. Consequently, they had availed cenvat credit on the amount of service ...

Read More

Abatement available on GTA service even if consignment note not mentions about non-availment of credit

Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Bolpur (CESTAT Kolkatta)

In absence of any particular format prescribed under the respective notifications, the department insisting for declaration on each consignment note for allowing the abatement under the said Notifications is un-sustainable in law. In these circumstances the declarations filed by the Goods Transport Agencies (GTA) in their letter-heads or ...

Read More

Principle of doctrine of unjust enrichment not applies to refund of ‘deposit of duty’

Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-VII Vs Krypton Industries (CESTAT Kolkata)

Undisputedly the respondent deposited the amount at the investigation stage and the proceeding initiated against them were dropped by ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dated 9-2-2011. It is a case of refund of deposit of duty and not a refund of duty therefore the principle of unjust enrichment which is applicable to refund of dut...

Read More

Cenvat credit cannot be denied on ground that supplier had paid excess duty

Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-III Vs Kitchen Appliances India Ltd. (CESTAT Kolkata)

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarvesh Refractories (P.) Ltd. v. CCE&C 2007 (218) ELT 488 has held that the issue of classification of the input/raw materials supplied by the input supplier cannot be questioned in the hands of input receiver while allowing Modvat/Cenvat credit....

Read More

Services provided by one unit of assessee to other unit not liable to service tax if Registration of Units based on same PAN

SAIL Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Ranchi (CESTAT Kolkata)

We find from the Central Excise Registration and the other documents furnished by the applicant that the Registration by Central Excise Department has been given by including PAN Number of SAIL. There is no dispute that the applicant is an unit of M/s SAIL and the other units are also part of M/s SAIL. Thus, we find that the service is be...

Read More

Service Tax Penalty cannot be imposed u/s. 76 and 78 simultaneously

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Mittal Technopack (P.) Ltd. (CESTAT Kolkata)

We are of the view that even if technically, scope of sections 76 and 78 of the Act may be different, as submitted on behalf of the revenue, the fact that penalty has been levied under section 78 could be taken into account for levying or not levying penalty under section 76 of the Act. In such situation, even if reasoning given by the ap...

Read More
Page 1 of 212

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,305)
Company Law (3,196)
Custom Duty (6,362)
DGFT (3,312)
Excise Duty (3,977)
Fema / RBI (3,108)
Finance (3,274)
Income Tax (24,133)
SEBI (2,642)
Service Tax (3,246)

Search Posts by Date

March 2017
M T W T F S S
« Feb    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031