Zydus Technologies Ltd. (the Assessee) filed a refund claim of Rs. 1,75,53,497/- for the services received by Special Economic Zones/ Developers (SEZ) vide application dated May 31, 2010 in terms of the Notification No. 9/2009-ST dated March 3, 2009
Excise duty exemption cannot be denied merely because the certificates were in the name of intermediary through whom the material was supplied for approved projects
In the instant case, proceeding was initiated against Universal Paper Mills Ltd. (the Appellant) in respect of the goods cleared during the period August 1997 to December 2000 and April 2001 to June 2001 which were confirmed vide the Order-in-Original dated May 31, 2007.
Vandana Travels & Tours (the Petitioner) is a Service provider as Rent-a-cab-operator. An Assessment Order dated March 16, 2010 for the period from September 2000 to September 2005, October 2005 to March 2006, April 2006 to March 2007 and May 2008 to July 2008 was passed
Bharti Airtel Ltd. (the Appellant)is engaged in the business of providing cellular services. The issue involved is admissibility of Cenvat credit on inputs, capital goods and input services used in the erection of transmission towers and shelters spread all over the country far from the office premises of the Appellant.
In the instant case, Jyotsana D. Patel (the Appellant) purchased a residential unit from a builder, on which the builder had collected Service tax and deposited the same with the Department. As there is no levy of Service tax on residential unit as held by the Hon’ble High Court
Fashion Suitings Private Limited (the Petitioner) received a Demand Notice dated October 8, 2013 for the payment of Service tax amounting to Rs 15,78,40,282/- with interest and penalty amounting to Rs. 17,08,00,086/- against the Order-in-Original dated October 26, 2012 during the pendency of Stay application before the Hon’ble Tribunal.
Ortiker India P. Ltd. (the Appellant or the Company) imported clamps from the related supplier outside India. The transactions were examined on arms length basis and the SVB branch vide order dated February 6, 2009 held that the transaction value has not been influenced
Anand Decors and Others (the Appellants) were manufacturing certain commodities and were registered dealers under the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (DVAT Act).The Appellants purchased motor vehicles/cars,paid Sales tax/ VAT but did not avail input tax credit thereon under DVAT Act.
Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. (the Assessee) is a dealer registered under the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (the Punjab VAT) engaged in selling mobile phones along with battery chargers and charges VAT at concessional rate of 4% on the sale value of battery chargers.
