CESTAT Mumbai ruled in favor of ATA Freightline, setting aside service tax demands for logistics services from April 2015 to June 2017. Full details of the case.
CESTAT Mumbai overturned the service tax demand on Hindustan Construction Co., ruling that reimbursements to group companies do not constitute taxable services.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that penalty on the employee of CHA (Customs House Agent) cannot be imposed on the charge of wrong availment of drawback by the exporter as proven that he has not been benefited by attempt to claim excess drawback by exporter.
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”.
