CESTAT Chennai held that in case of Inter-unit transfer of goods for captive consumption, the actual cost of production (100% of the cost of production), of the raw material procured from the Bhadrachalam unit of the appellant [excluding the notional loading under Rule 8 – 15% / 10%] is the cost of raw material in the hands of the Chennai unit
CESTAT Delhi held that manual breast pump has nothing to do with any medical or surgical procedures nor is it used by any medical practitioner hence the same is classifiable under CTH 39269090.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that review of declared price without any evidence, to the effect that relation has influenced the declared price or to the effect that there was flow back of money from importer to related supplier, is unsustainable in law.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that remission of duty available as variation in KL is only due to density of the goods that due to different temperature at the time of loading and unloading.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that excess duty paid on difference between the clearance value from the factory and the sale value from the depot is refundable. Further, such refund cannot be rejected on ground that appellant has not followed provisional assessment.
CESTAT Delhi held that the subsidy amount received under Rajasthan Investment Promotion Policy-2003 using VAT-37B challan cannot be included in the transaction value for the purpose of levy of central excise duty under section 4 of the Excise Act.
CESTAT Delhi held that in case of amendment in Bill of Entry, period of limitation should be counted from the date of amendment and not from the date of assessment of Bill of Entry.
CESTAT Delhi held that provisions of section 6 of the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (the 2020 Act) extends the time limit specified in the Tariff Act for issuance of the notification imposing anti-dumping duty.
CESTAT Mumbai held that tariff items within heading 8523 don’t offer scope for inclusion of ‘software’ of any type in the residual entry ‘others’ owing to the exhaustive enumeration in description in that heading.
CESTAT Delhi held that exemption benefit of Central Excise Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 not available as new conditions amended vide Notification No. 34/2015-CE dated 17.7.2015 not satisfied.
