CESTAT Chennai held that the mismatch in the SAD vs VAT / CST paid caused by different rates at which the tax is paid cannot be held against the refund applicant. Further, reasons for disbelieving the CA’s certificate also not clearly spelt out. Accordingly, rejection of refund claim unsustainable.
Where preferential location charges charged by the builder includible in the taxable value of the service tax levy and no separate charge was levied, the liability to pay service tax did not arise as it was only when a particular service was separately charged that the liability to pay service tax arose.
CESTAT Chennai held that exemption from customs duty admissible on import of flood lights which is used for all matches conducted in the stadium whether it is world cup international match or one day international match.
Delhi High Court held that denial of Cenvat Credit merely because invoice contained incorrect address unjustified as invoice contained all the requisite particulars as required under proviso to Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that sugar boiled confectionery Kopiko is more specifically classifiable under Central Excise Tariff Heading [CETH] 1704 9090 and not under CETH 2101 as claimed by department.
CESTAT Delhi held that the amount of redemption fine imposed by the Commissioner in the impugned order is equal to the value of the goods itself, the same is harsh, accordingly, concluded that the amount of redemption fine must be reduced.
CESTAT Bangalore held that rejecting request for amendment of declared value in bill of entry (BOE) without awaiting outcome of DRI investigation not justified. Accordingly, order set aside and matter remanded back to adjudication authority.
CESTAT Chennai held that the imported Clear Float Glass is more appropriately classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 7005 1090 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and thus is eligible for exemption of the benefit of the Notification No. 46/2011-Cus dated 01.06.2011.
CESTAT Bangalore held that import of brushless DC/Axial fans meant for use in electronic industry should be valued at Transaction Value under Section 4 of Central Excise Act and accordingly, demand of Countervailing Duty on the same unsustainable.
CESTAT Bangalore held that cross-model utilisation of discount resulting into undervaluation are inadmissible under section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
