CESTAT Delhi held that once rule 10(b) of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1944 gets applicable, residual rule 11 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1944 cannot be applied. Hence, demand confirmed under rule 11 is liable to be set aside.
CESTAT Allahabad held that as per provisions of section 35C(1A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 granting of adjournment beyond three times is unjustifiable. Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution in terms of Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982
CESTAT Delhi held that absolute confiscation of the gold and imposition of penalty thereon justifiable on account of illicit smuggling of gold without any valid documents.
A recent CESTAT Kolkata ruling clarifies that copyright services related to original artistic works are exempt from service tax under Section 65(zzzzt) of Finance Act.
A recent CESTAT Kolkata ruling on service tax liability clarifies that works contracts with material supply are not liable for service tax before June 1, 2007.”
CESTAT Allahabad held that service tax is leviable on services relating to health & fitness by way of teaching yoga and meditation under the category of ‘Health and Fitness Services’.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that Cenvat Credit of duty paid on inputs used in manufacture of final products cleared without payment of duty and which is further utilized for manufacture of final products on which duty is paid is allowable.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that in case of production of a new retail sale price, duty is to be calculated on pro-rata basis, in the present case only four days, when the production has taken place.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that in case of production of a new retail sale price, duty is to be calculated on pro-rata basis, in the present case only four days, when the production has taken place.
CESTAT Kolkata held that the charges paid for services rendered by the FTOs (i.e. Foreign Telecommunication Operators) cannot be taxed under head ‘telecommunication services’. Accordingly, demand set aside.
