CESTAT Mumbai held that section 14 of Customs Act, 1962, or any Rules framed thereunder, is not of relevance to the rough diamonds as the same are leviable to NIL duty as per the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
This article delves into the complexities of service tax demand under the reverse charge mechanism, emphasizing the importance of analyzing transactions individually. We examine a recent case involving M.P. Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Ltd and provide insights on the matter.
CESTAT Chennai held that the Chick drinker, Auto feeder, and Poultry cage are rightly classifiable under CETH 84361000 and not under CETH 39269099.
CESTAT Kolkata held that Low Aromatic White Spirit is rightly classifiable under the CTH 27101990 and not classifiable as ‘Light Oil and Preparations’ under CTH 27101239
CESTAT Chennai held that as appellant is providing main service i.e. business support service on his own account and is not acting as an intermediary i.e. the services were performed by the appellant on a principal-to-principal basis and at arm’s length basis.
CESTAT, remanded order passed by Adjudicating Authority and held that denial of cross-examination of witnesses is violative of principles of natural justice.
CESTAT Chennai held that renting of immovable property for a hotel is expressly excluded from the ambit of the taxable service in Section 65(105)(zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, demand not sustainable.
Classification of non-textured fabrics must be based on nature and material coated as end use of a product could not be a criteria for classification, the other parameters such as the nature of cloth, nature of coating etc were required to be ascertained to classify the fabrics.
In a landmark ruling, CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that the Cenvat credit is applicable on cement and steel used in Commercial and Industrial Construction Services, marking a key interpretation of Cenvat credit rules.
Explore the decisive ruling by the CESTAT Ahmedabad in the Thakarshi J Likhiya Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST case, focusing on the invocation of the extended period of limitation in service tax demand.
