CESTAT held that for extended limitation period to apply, department must establish elements such as suppression or fraud. Since no such allegations were made in notices, extended period could not be invoked.
CESTAT quashes duty demand on Vodafone Idea’s imported telecom equipment, favoring classification under CTI 8517 70 90 over CTI 8517 62 90.
CESTAT Allahabad rules that screening films in multiplexes is not a Business Support Service, quashing service tax demand on PVS Multiplex India Pvt. Ltd.
CESTAT Kolkata ruled on Emami Paper Mills Ltd vs Commissioner of Customs, addressing issues of PSIA certificates, penal liabilities, and re-examination of goods.
Understand the CESTAT Mumbai order on absence of speaking order under Section 17(5) of Customs Act. Detailed analysis, implications, and conclusion.
Read about CESTAT Hyderabads ruling on the classification of Minute Maid Nimbu Fresh by Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. under Central Excise Tariff Act. Understand implications and decisions.
Explore CESTAT Mumbai’s order on IBM India vs Commissioner of Customs, disputing classification of Optical Transceivers under Customs Tariff Item 8517 6290 for duty exemptions.
CESTAT Kolkata rules that royalty and license fees are not to be added to the transaction value of imported parts in the case of Commissioner of Customs Vs Humboldt Wedag India.
Read the full text of the CESTAT Kolkata order on A.S. Chattha Exim Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs. The tribunal upheld the rejection of refund claims for Special Additional Duty (SAD) on imported goods.
CESTAT set aside demand of service tax on amounts received as booking cancellation charges, price difference & corporate discount, interest on income tax refunds, warranty claims (parts), procurement charges for volume discount
