Follow Us :

Archive: 29 August 2015

Posts in 29 August 2015

Free Live Webinar: Dematerialization of Securities and Recent Amendments

July 2, 2024 2631 Views 0 comment Print

Join our free webinar on July 4th at 4:00 PM to gain insights into the dematerialization of securities and recent amendments. Register now for key updates.

Free Webinar: Analysis of 10 Recent Income Tax Judgments in Favour of Assessee

July 1, 2024 4344 Views 0 comment Print

Join our free webinar on July 7 at 5 PM for insights into 10 recent High Court income tax judgments favoring assessees. Expert analysis by CA Dipak Dama.

Erroneous payment of duty on exempted goods would not render the goods dutiable

August 29, 2015 835 Views 0 comment Print

The assessee Integral Coach Factory (ICF) belonging to the Central Government is engaged in the business of manufacturing passenger coaches both self-propelled and non-propelled, steel freight containers and parts of passenger coaches for railways under Chapter 86 of CET 1985.

CENVAT credit on capital goods used in the construction/erection of plant is allowed

August 29, 2015 2318 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of M/s.Thiru Arooran Sugars Vs. The Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hon’ble Madras High Court held that CENVAT credit on capital goods used in the erection of various capital goods, viz., M.S.Plates, M.S.Angles, M.S.Channels and H.R. Plates, which were purchased

‘Close up’ should be classified as dental cleaner, not toothpaste–SC

August 29, 2015 2373 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of Commissioner Of Central Excise, Vapi Vs. M/s. Global Health Care Products , the Supreme Court held that ‘Close up’ should be classified as dental cleaner, not toothpaste on account of different

CENVAT credit of outdoor catering & outward transportation upto place of removal allowed

August 29, 2015 1958 Views 0 comment Print

In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Vs. M/s. Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd., Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the CENVAT credit of the service tax paid in respect of cell phone services, catering services

Endorsement on bill of entry amount to raising demand under customs law and not mere a provisional assessment

August 29, 2015 2097 Views 0 comment Print

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Swastika Enterprise held that the endorsement on the bill of entry to pay additional customs duty is a demand and not mere a provisional assessment. Thus, the duty payable due to such endorsement can be settled as settlement of demand under indirect taxes demand settlement scheme.

Proceedings under Central Excise Act get abated on the death of assessee

August 29, 2015 10061 Views 0 comment Print

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shabina Abraham & others held that the estate of a dead person cannot be attached for recovery of excise duty payable because there is no enabling provision in the Act to do so.

Exemption Notification cannot discriminate between persons paying duty under different methods permissible under law

August 29, 2015 975 Views 0 comment Print

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s N.S. Rathnam& Sons held that when two methods are permissible under the statutory scheme itself to discharge duty liability then merely because with the adoption of one particular method the duty that becomes payable is lesser

Job work – Valuation under Excise

August 29, 2015 9300 Views 0 comment Print

A job work transaction triggers Excise Duty liability if the process involves manufacture. The consequent question that arises is how to determine assessable value of the goods involved. The various provisions that linger in one’s mind are Rule 10 A 0r Rule 8 or Rule 11 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000.

Why PRACTICE over Employment

August 29, 2015 1987 Views 0 comment Print

A small disclaimer before proceeding – this is my first write up and I hope you rate me on same basis. Before reasoning why I prefer Practice over the other, I would like to confess straight away that none of them is superior over the other. Choose what you would like be in future, choose where you want to see yourself some years down the line, whether as a CEO/CFO/the likes or a successful entrepreneur of something of your own.

Intention of letting out property is to be seen for section 23(1)(c)

August 29, 2015 8277 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Mumbai held in case of ACIT vs. Suryashankar Properties Limited that Intention of letting out the property is to be seen for invoking clause (c) of section 23(1) for computing the annual letting value of the property and it is irrelevant whether the property is/was let out.

Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031