CESTAT Kolkata held that activity of laying down the pipelines for Government/ Government Undertaking for supply of water from Kerala Water Authority (KWA) in Thiruvananthapuram city doesn’t attract service tax. Accordingly, refund claim allowed.
CESTAT Bangalore rules Montanide ISA 206 VG is not classifiable as a veterinary vaccine. Penalty on Bharat Biotech under Customs Act deleted.
CESTAT rules that supervision and efficiency test charges paid to overseas suppliers can’t be included in the assessable value for customs duty.
Pankaj Ispat Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) Forfeited amount for Order Cancellation was not consideration for any service, and therefore not subject to service tax
CESTAT Mumbai quashes SCN against fruit seller for non-payment of service tax, ruling it was not engaged in a service tax leviable activity.
In Topaz Service Corporation Vs Commissioner of CGST (CESTAT Delhi), it was ruled that Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services should only tax pure service contracts, excluding composite contracts with goods.
CESTAT Delhi held that granting “call option” is not an activity of rendering service. Thus, appellant has wrongly been held to have been a service provider while receiving “call option fee”.
CESTAT Delhi held that imposition of penalty and revocation of customs broker license justified as customs broker abetted the illegal export and also failed to comply with the provisions of CBLR, 2018.
CESTAT Chennai rejection of refund claim merely for non-mentioning of period particulars in CA’s certificate unjustifiable as rejection of claim on this basis would be harsh.
Oceanic Consultants Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner or Central Excise And Service Tax (CESTAT Chandigarh) CESTAT Chandigarh held that Indian Company engaged in promoting and marketing services provided by Australian Company is eligible for the benefit of the export of services. Facts- The appellants, M/s Oceanic Consultants Private Limited, have been engaged by M/s Oceanic Consultants […]
