Service tax not payable on mere collection of event fees for organisers

Indian Pharmaceutical Association Vs Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai)

The appellant does not offer ‘convention services’ but gets events organised by professionals and, by collecting fees which are transmitted to such organisers, enables its members to participate in them. There is no allegation that any part of the fees charged by convention organisers is retained by the appellant. Thus, the activity ...

Read More

When penalty imposed on firm, penalty cannot be imposed on its partner

Awin Exim Company Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

Gujarat High Court in case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Jai Prakash Motwani, when penalty is imposed on partnership firm, penalty cannot be imposed on its partner....

Read More

Metalizing of film not amounts to manufacture: CESTAT

Mathew Abraham Vs C.C.E. & S.T.- Surat-i (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

Mathew Abraham Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Riva Exports Ltd. Wherein the present appellant is working as Accounts Manager has supplied the films for job work under the cover of job work challan. In my considered view this is more than sufficient compliance for transaction of the goods. Since Riva Exports not a […...

Read More

Cenvat credit on inputs used in excess of what prescribed when available

Bhawani Press Metal & Body Building Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCEx. (CESTAT Kolkata)

Observing that actual consumption of material could vary from bill of material supplied along with designs and drawings by the principal, CESTAT  Kolkata has set aside  demand  of  Cenvat   credit on alleged excess inputs....

Read More

Even if excise duty was legally not payable, credit cannot be denied

Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)

Credit cannot be denied in the hands of the recipient even if the duty was legally not payable by the supplier or that higher amount of duty has been paid by the supplier against whom the department has initiated proceedings....

Read More

Exemption Use in any other project but for specified work, does not bar exemption

Gammon India Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import) (CESTAT Mumbai)

CESTAT Mumbai has allowed benefit of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. (Sl. No. 230) to hydraulically operated self-propelled piling rig for construction of road in a case where it was alleged that the goods were involved in activities other than those specified....

Read More

Cenvat reversal on inputs cleared as such FIFO system to be followed

Wimplast Ltd. Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmadabad)

In a case involving removal of inputs as such, CESTAT Ahmedabad has held that first-in first-out (FIFO) system must be applied and removal of inputs from the old stock of a manufacturer must be considered. t noted that that the quantity removed from time to time was carried forward from the old stock and the stock balance of the input was...

Read More

Cenvat credit on maintenance charges for common area of business premises

Mahle Engine Components Pvt. Ltd. Vs CGST, C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Delhi)

CESTAT Delhi has allowed Cenvat credit on maintenance charges for common area of a business premises taken on rent by assessee. The charges were related to roads, street lights, drainage, etc., provided beyond the manufacturing premises but were charged based on per square meter of business premises occupied....

Read More

Interest allowable from date of deposit to date of refund: CESTAT

Riba Textiles Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CE & S (CESTAT Chandigarh)

It was held that Appellant is entitled to interest for the period  from the date of deposit (deposit made during investigation) to till date of refund and also amounts deposited by way of pre deposit at the time of filing of Appeals,  shall be entitled to interest for the period from the date of  deposit to till the date of refund. ...

Read More

Demand of anti-dumping duty for imports under Advance Authorisation

Kopran Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (E), (CESTAT Mumbai)

Kopran Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (E) (CESTAT Mumbai) Rejecting the plea that bond/LUT executed by assessee-importer did not cover the anti-dumping duty leviable on material imported under Advance Authorisation, The Tribunal observed that the bond executed did not make any distinction between the duties leviable. Larger Bench order i...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,438)
Company Law (5,282)
Custom Duty (7,559)
DGFT (4,091)
Excise Duty (4,318)
Fema / RBI (3,948)
Finance (4,105)
Income Tax (31,609)
SEBI (3,296)
Service Tax (3,508)