ELFA-based VIDAS diagnostic kits were eligible for the customs exemption available to ELISA kits under Notification No. 50/2017-Cus. It further held that the dispute was interpretational, the extended limitation period was wrongly invoked, and the consequential demand of duty, interest, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalties was liable to be set aside.
CESTAT Hyderabad set aside a reverse charge Service Tax demand, holding that accounting differences alone cannot establish taxability or justify extended limitation.
CESTAT Allahabad held duty paid under protest remains a duty deposit under Section 11B, with interest under Section 11BB payable only for statutory delay.
CESTAT held refund interest is payable under Section 35FF where the amount was treated as pre-deposit for appeal and accepted as such by revenue authorities.
CESTAT Delhi held SEZ Act Section 26 overrides service tax notification conditions, allowing refund on services used for authorised SEZ operations.
CESTAT Mumbai allowed an SEZ service tax refund, holding Section 26 of the SEZ Act prevails and authorised operations cannot be denied on procedural grounds.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that non-submission of Forms A-1 and A-2 is only a procedural lapse. It allowed the exemption as the services were admittedly provided to an SEZ unit.
CESTAT Delhi held that the SEZ Act grants a statutory exemption overriding conditions in service tax notifications. It allowed the refund claims but denied interest on delayed refunds.
CESTAT Allahabad held ex-gratia job charges for underutilised production capacity are compensation, not consideration for a taxable service under Section 66E(e).
CESTAT Delhi allowed refund of pre-deposit, holding payment under a wrong Service Tax registration is a rectifiable defect and cannot defeat a valid refund.
