CESTAT Ahmedabad held that enhancement of import value merely on the basis of consent letter of the importer without following due process of law as contemplated u/s. 14 of the Customs Act read with Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 is unsustainable in law.
CESTAT Ahmedabad clarifies that minor discrepancies shouldn’t lead to recovery of customs refund if CA certifies stock report. Learn more about Santosh Timber Trading Co Ltd Vs C.C.
Explore the CESTAT ruling in Winsome Breweries Ltd vs Commissioner case regarding service tax implications on beer manufacturing services provided to United Breweries Limited (UBL).
Delve into the analysis of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation vs Joint Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi). Understand the implications of extended period limitations and intent to evade duty in tax cases.
CESTAT Delhi held that miscellaneous services rendered by air travel agent like planning travel itinerary of clients, etc. are covered within the ambit of Air Travel Agent and cannot be classified under Business Support Service.
In Gujarat Guardian Ltd Vs C.C.E-Bharuch, CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that remuneration paid as commission to whole-time directors based on profit doesn’t constitute an employer-employee relationship, thus no service tax applies.
Read about the CESTAT Ahmedabads ruling in the case of Inox India P Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, affirming the exemption of service tax for authorized operations within SEZ.
Delve into Veneer Mills vs Commissioner of Customs case dissected by CESTAT Chennai, affirming SAD refund despite certificate dispute, with expert insights.
PS Bedi & Co Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs case analyzed. CESTAT Chennai sets aside confiscation of hand tools, deeming them capital goods under FTP.
Oasis Impex appeals CESTAT Ahmedabad’s reclassification of imported calcite powder. CESTAT rules against rejection without cogent reason. Details of the case explained.
