All CESTAT

Refund of cenvat credit on Business Services and Club Membership was allowable without having nexus between Input and Output Services

KKR India Advisors Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of CGST (CESTAT Mumbai)

Denial of Cenvat credit can be done only by issuing notice under Rule 14 and the department could not reject refund of Cenvat credit solely under Rule 5. Since the availability of credit had not been questioned by the department herein by issuing show cause notice in terms of Rule 14 ibid, the refund benefit could not be denied on the gro...

Read More

Demand based on the statement which was not allowed to be cross-examined is unjustified

Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax Excise & Customs Vs Mittal Pigments Pvt Ltd (CESTAT Delhi)

CESTAT Delhi held that demand solely on the basis of the statement of the person who was not allowed to be cross-examined by the appellant is unjustified....

Read More

Service provided to Gujarat Energy Transmission Corporation Ltd. is exempt from service tax

N P Patel & Co Vs C.S.T.-Service Tax (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

CESTAT Ahmedabad held that service provided to Gujarat Energy Transmission Corporation Ltd. are exempted from the payment of service tax in terms of Notification No. 45/2010–ST dated 20.07.2010...

Read More

Reversal of credit not required while clearance of waste and scrap

Forgings (India) Iron & Steel Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)

CESTAT Kolkata held that as waste and scrap are not manufactured goods the legislature have consciously not made any provisions for reversal of any credit taken on duty paid inputs in case of clearance of waste and scrap...

Read More

DGFT Clarification prevails over allegation by Customs Department

Amar Cold Storage Vs C.C.-Jamnagar (prev) (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

Amar Cold Storage Vs C.C.-Jamnagar (Prev) (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT held that change of circumstances by way of clarification issued by the DGFT and withdrawal of the show cause notice, there was no scope for adjudicating authority to deviate from the decision taken by the DGFT to classify the goods under DEPB Entry at Sr.No.2/66 therefo...

Read More

Appellant refrained from filing refund claim by CBIC circular till SC verdict – Period till SC verdict not includible in limitation

Variety Lumbers Pvt. Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

Variety Lumbers Pvt. Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The refund claim was admittedly not filed within the period of one year as prescribed in paragraph 2 of clause C of Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007 and the same stands filed within a period of one year from the date of order of Hon’ble […]...

Read More

CENVAT credit cannot be denied for mere mention of Individual name after company name  

Arkkays National Engineering & Foundry Co. Unit-I Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)

CENVAT credit cannot be denied on Chartered Accountant services for mere mention of Individual name after company name and Mere allegation in SCN cannot be a ground to deny Credit on bank charges ...

Read More

Service Tax not payable on refundable security deposits from customers

ATS Township Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner Central GST (CESTAT Allahabad)

ATS Township Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner Central GST (CESTAT Allahabad) The issue relates to inclusion of the amount collected by the appellant as Interest Free Maintenance Security (IFMS). Revenue’s contention is that the said collected amount would fall under the category of ‘Management Maintenance and Repair Services’ and would be ...

Read More

No duty leviable in absence of corroborative evidence on allegation of Clandestine manufacture and removal of Finished Goods

Maa Foundry Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)

Duty could not be demanded on the ground that there was absence of corroborative evidence on allegation of clandestine manufacture and removal of finished goods as ,the allegation of clandestine manufacture and removal of finished goods by the Appellant made in the Show Cause Notice, was merely on assumption and presumption, without suffi...

Read More

No allegation/ evidence demonstrates violation of regulation 10(n) of Customs Broker Licencing Regulations, 2018

Shree Simandhar Shipping Service Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs (General) (CESTAT Mumbai)

CESTAT Mumbai held that there are no allegations/ evidence that demonstrate that the customs broker didnt demonstrate speed and efficiency in respect of the impugned goods and hence there is no contravention of regulation 10(n) of Customs Broker Licencing Regulations, 2018...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (6,180)
Company Law (8,631)
Corporate Law (10,964)
Custom Duty (9,595)
DGFT (4,887)
Excise Duty (4,929)
Fema / RBI (5,344)
Finance (5,765)
Income Tax (43,206)
SEBI (4,663)
Service Tax (4,094)

Search Posts by Date

December 2022
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031