A deep dive into CESTAT Kolkata’s ruling in Commissioner of Customs Vs K.K. Woollens, where the court confirmed penalties for undetermined imports of used clothes.
CESTAT Mumbai held that duty liability in terms of Chewing tobacco & Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2010 unsustainable merely alleging that sealed/uninstalled packing machine is available in the factory premises.
CESTAT Kolkata held that appellant were under the bonafide belief that processes undertaken by them doesn’t amount to manufacture and accordingly, they cleared goods to raw material supplier on collection of job charges only. Accordingly, extended period of limitation not invocable.
CESTAT Allahabad held that denial of refund claim of service tax under notification no. 9/2009-ST dated 03.03.2009 as taxable service in respect of which refund is claim is not mentioned in the list of specified service approved by SEZ authority unjustified.
CESTAT Chennai upholds the demand of concession availed vide customs notification on failure of appellant to maintain proper accountal of the receipt of imported goods till their utilization in the manufacture of the specified finished products.
CESTAT Chennai rules in favor of Renault Nissan Automotive India, stating that their refund claim can’t be rejected for not opting for Provisional Assessment.
Analyzing the S R Traders vs. Commissioner of Customs case under Customs Act Section 28, including undervaluation and compliance issues with cosmetics imports.
CESTAT Ahmedabad quashes penalty on Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) due to lack of clarity on service tax liability. Learn more in this article.
Dive into the RKM Powergen vs. Customs case. Learn how project import benefits can’t be denied if the contract registration process began before the goods’ importation.
In a recent CESTAT Mumbai order, the eligibility of cenvat credit for bus transportation charges is discussed. Learn the key details and implications here.
