All CESTAT

Adjudication order not valid if no valid service of show cause notice

Baldeep Singh Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)

Baldeep Singh Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) In the present case inspite of opportunity given, Revenue failed to produce the proof of delivery of the show cause notice. Further, from perusal of the order-in-original, I find that the Adjudicating Authority have not recorded satisfaction of service of show cause notice and have p...

Read More

Mutual Fund trading is different from redemption of MF units

Ace Creative Learning Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore)

Ace Creative Learning Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore) Appellant is providing Commercial Training and Coaching Services and they have also invested in the mutual funds and have earned profit during the year 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 which they have shown as under the head ‘other income’. The Dep...

Read More

CESTAT confirms Release of Drones, intended for Government to Fight Covid-19

Commissioner of Customs Vs Kamdar Global Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (CESTAT Chennai)

Commissioner of Customs Vs Kamdar Global Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (CESTAT Chennai) It is noted that the goods were specifically imported for meeting the requirements during the pandemic. Drones were intended to be used for monitoring the public as to whether there is violation of the restrictions for travel and gathering of people. It is also ...

Read More

Duty paid under protest- Rejection of refund for time-bar is unsustainable

AGFA Healthcare Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)

AGFA Healthcare Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) On perusal of the documents, it is seen that there is no dispute that the appellant has paid excess duty of Rs.29,57,931/- after reassessment of the bills of entry by extending the benefit of Notification No. 12/2012-CE. The refund has been rejected on the ground [&helli...

Read More

Clandestine removal cannot be upheld merely based upon third party documents

Sanjay Goel Vs Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)

Sanjay Goel Vs Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) Apparently and admittedly, no search was conducted in premises of any of the present appellants. No physical verification of the stock of present appellants was conducted. Both the show cause notices, the initial order-in-original and the impugned order under chal...

Read More

CENVAT Credit on Inputs used in Fabrication of ‘Clean Room’ eligible to Pharma Companies

Syncom Formulations (I) Ltd. Vs Commissioner (CESTAT Delhi)

Syncom Formulations (I) Ltd. Vs Commissioner (CESTAT Delhi) I find that admittedly, the appellant have used the disputed inputs for fabrication of clean room, which is essential for manufacture of their dutiable goods, as such clean room is  necessary for maintaining proper temperature and hygiene as well as keeping the RH factor in cont...

Read More

Refund of Service Tax wrongly paid only if no unjust enrichment proved by Appellant

Rakesh Canteen Contractor Vs Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs & ServiceTax (CESTAT Delhi)

Rakesh Canteen Contractor Vs Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs & ServiceTax (CESTAT Delhi) The brief facts are that the appellant has been awarded canteen services contract from M/s Caparo Engineering India Limited, by way of running and managing their canteen located in their factory premises. The only issue involved in this appe...

Read More

Clandestine removal based on mere third party documents is invalid

Recon Steel & Power Private Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner, Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Delhi)

Recon Steel & Power Private Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner, Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Since the sole challenge to the order is its reliance upon third party evidence, it is necessary to check the evidentiary value of the third party The relevant case law in the case of Bajrangbali Ingots & Steel [&he...

Read More

If a Rule is not attracted, than the proviso thereunder does not attracted

Vishnu Fragrance Pvt.Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Central Excise and Customs (CESTAT Delhi)

Vishnu Fragrance Pvt.Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Central Excise and Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Rule 10 of Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2010, provides for abatement in case of non production of goods (in case of factory did not pr...

Read More

Cenvat Credit admissible on input service used for creation of storage facilities for inputs outside the premises in relation to manufacture of goods

Balkrishna Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi)

Balkrishna Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) Service in question i.e. renting of immovable property is very well covered in ‘means’ as well as ‘includes’ clause of the definition of the input service as given under Rule 2 (I) of Cenvat Credit Rule, 2004. This Rule allows Cenvat Credit...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,324)
Company Law (7,113)
Custom Duty (8,397)
DGFT (4,507)
Excise Duty (4,467)
Fema / RBI (4,616)
Finance (4,886)
Income Tax (36,556)
SEBI (3,902)
Service Tax (3,695)

Search Posts by Date

April 2021
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930