CESTAT Delhi held that Clad with compatible non-clad aluminium foil didn’t had any commercial supplies in the domestic industry during the period of investigation and hence anti-dumping duty on the same is not leviable.
In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court clarified that construction services provided by cooperative housing societies to members are not subject to service tax.
CESTAT Ahmedabad exempts IPL player Ajitesh Kamlesh Argal from service tax on remuneration, setting a precedent on employment vs brand promotion in sports.
Hair Transplant is neither undertaken to restore or reconstruct anatomy or its functions, nor the procedure of hair transplant restores developmental abnormalities degenerative diseases, injury or trauma. We find that hair transplant is a medical procedure to improve outer look of the body for time being and it does in any way contributes to the anatomy or functions of human body.
Shairu Gems Diamonds Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of Service Tax-IV (CESTAT Mumbai) CESTAT find that the learned Commissioner at paragraph 2 has referred to the show cause notice dated 21.08.2012 having been issued to the appellant, seeking confirmation of service tax demand for the period 2008 to 2012. He has also recorded that the said […]
CESTAT held that unless CENVAT Credit availed by the appellant has not been recovered by way of issue of show cause notice invoking Rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the CENVAT Credit available on the books of account cannot be rejected when it is accumulated on account of export of Service.
CESTAT Delhi held that as domestic industry doesn’t manufacture/produce colour coated coil, anti-dumping duty cannot be imposed on the same.
The issue on merit that whether the service of construction of complex provided by the appellant’s cooperative housing society to its members is eligible to service tax or otherwise has been settled in favour of the appellant. It was informed by the learned counsel that the Hon’ble High Court’s judgment (supra) has been accepted by the revenue.
H.C. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner, Central Excise & CGST Alwar (CESTAT Delhi) As regards the second submission regarding the certificate dated March 31, 2010 issued by the Regional Manager, RIICO, a perusal of the said certificate would show that it was issued by the Regional Manager RIICO in connection with the commercial plot allotted […]
Indus Tropics Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T. Rajkot (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The issue in brief is that though entire defaulted amount of central excise duty along with interest stands deposited with a delay of few weeks, the Department is of the view that as per the provisions of Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, the […]
