CESTAT Ahmedabad held that services availed in respect of effluent treatment plant for treatment of industrial waste is in relation to the overall manufacturing activity and hence CENVAT Credit is duly admissible.
CESTAT Delhi held that the transaction of purchase and sale of liquor by the Corporation will not fall within the ambit of ‘Business Auxiliary Services’ and would, therefore, not be taxable.
CESTAT Delhi held that maintenance charges towards the maintenance of documents and towards the security of documents by keeping the same at the premises of the appellants is rendering of service of ‘Maintenance, Management or Repair Service’ and hence demand confirmed.
Whether it be registration or centralized registration, when there was no mandatory provision in the Rules regarding registration, the Cenvat Credit could not be denied, the three authorities committed a serious error in rejecting the claim for refund on the ground which was not existence in law.
Read the case of State Bank of India vs Commissioner of Service Tax and importance of discretion in handling funds under PPF accounts. Learn how CESTAT Mumbai decision impacts classification of services and taxability.
Read the full text of the CESTAT Chennai order in the case of VLCC Health Care Ltd vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise. The issue revolved around whether the appellant was liable to pay service tax at the revised rate of 12.24% for the period prior to 18.04.2006. The order provides an analysis of relevant provisions and concludes that the demand cannot sustain, setting it aside.
Read the full text of the CESTAT Ahmedabad order in the case of Rajkot District Co Operative Bank Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST. The issue revolved around the liability to pay service tax on the commission received by the appellant from the Agriculture Insurance Company of India Limited. The order analyzes the applicability of an exemption notification and concludes that the appellant is eligible for the exemption, therefore not liable to pay service tax on the commission received.
CESTAT Kolkata held that denial of credit of service tax stating that coal and iron ore mines situated away from the factory is unsustainable as no material has been placed on record by the revenue to substantiate that the mines were owned by separate entities.
CESTAT Chennai held that refund under section 11B duly available as there can be no levy of service tax on the activity of transportation of gas up to delivery point at customer’s premises as it pertains to self-service.
CESTAT Mumbai held that the discount/ commission/incentives given for sale of cars cannot be treated as compensation received by the appellant for any services provided to the car manufacturer.
