Gabriel India Limited Vs Commissioner, Central Goods & Service Tax and Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) w.e.f. 01.07.2017, the Government of India had introduced GST regime which has replaced earlier Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 with transitional period of 30 days. Accordingly, after 30.07.2017, no assessee is permitted to avail credit in the cenvat credit account. As […]
B.L. Goel & Company Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Central Goods & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The brief facts are that the appellant is engaged in running Works Contract Services and services of construction of residential complexes during the period 2013-14 till 2017-2018 (June 2017). Show cause notice dated 23.04.2019 was issued demanding service […]
CESTAT held that once the buyer of a flat cancelled the booking and the consideration for service was returned, the service contract got terminated and once it is established the no service is provided, then refund of tax for such service becomes admissible.
CESTAT Delhi held that period of limitation should be calculated from the date when the order was served and not from the date when order was dispatched.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that service tax is not payable by Stock Broking Company on various charges like Computer to Computer Linkage charges Commission on Public Issue and Inter Settlement charges.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that benefit of notification no. 67/95-CE duly available on transfer of goods to additional premise as additional premise is an extension of factory of the appellant.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that service tax not leviable on construction service provided to Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission and Rajiv Awaas Yojana.
CESTAT Mumbai held that confirmation of differential duty necessarily has interest liability appended to it Accordingly liability to pay interest on duties short-paid at the time of clearance of goods for captive consumption does not get erased.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held the eligible cenvat credit of service tax paid during setting up of the factory is duly available as without use of such service the appellant could not have possibly manufactured the excisable goods.
CESTAT Mumbai held that demand under the provisions of Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 unsustainable as number of installed machines before and after replacement of machines remained same.
