Cenvat credit cannot be denied for use of prime quality materials for manufacture of final products

Shakambari Overseas Traders Private Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & CX (CESTAT Kolkata)

There is no restriction in CENVAT Credit Rules that Appellants should not use the prime quality materials for the manufacture of final products, CENVAT credit cannot be denied...

Read More

Redemption Fine cannot be demanded merely for issue of PSI certificate by Branch Office

ARS Steels & Alloy International Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)

When the question is considered in the larger perspective, it is clear that there is no violation as alleged, more so because the PSI certificate issued by the Branch was subsequently ratified by the DGFT (as reflected in paragraph 25 of the Order-in-Original), which serves the purpose....

Read More

Verizon India eligible for refund of Cenvat on Services to Verizon USA rendered as principal service provider

Verizon India Pvt. Limited Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)

Verizon India Pvt. Limited Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The case of Revenue is that the location of service provider/appellant is in India and further in terms of Rule 9 of POPS, the service provided, being intermediary services, the location of the service provider under Rule 9 of POPS, shall be the place […]...

Read More

CESTAT allows Cenvat Credit of Input Services used for Removal & Disposal of Fly Ash

Shyam Metalics & Energy Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & CX (CESTAT Kolkata)

The issue required to be decided in the present appeal is as to whether the services obtained by the appellant for removal of coal fly ash from the captive power plant which is used for generation of power, which in turn, is captively consumed for manufacture of excisable goods, can be held to be an eligible cenvatable input service....

Read More

Trading of SIM Cards & Recharge Coupons not amounts to providing BAS

J.K. Enterprises Vs Principal Commissioner (CESTAT Delhi)

CESTAT held that buying and selling of SIM cards and recharge coupons does not amount to providing business auxiliary service (BAS)...

Read More

Refund claim not to be filed for suo motu credit of Cenvat reversed earlier

Mideast Integrated Steels Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CGST & Excise (CESTAT Kolkata)

Suo motu credit of Cenvat reversed earlier involved only an account entry reversal and in the process, no outflow of funds from the assesse and accordingly, filing of refund claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, is not required....

Read More

No service tax for brand endorsement during IPL as the same was not “business support service”

Yusuf Khan M Pathan Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

Service tax demand against famous cricketers and brothers, Irfan Pathan and Yusuf Pathan was not justified as they were not providing any service as an independent individual worker therefore, they were not liable to service tax under the Business Support Service for brand endorsement during IPL....

Read More

No custom duty recovery on import of aircrafts in absence of findings by Competent Authority

Chimes Aviation Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi )

Chimes Aviation Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Conclusion: Confiscation and customs duty recovery order against Chimes Aviation Private Limited for use of aircrafts for purposes other than training was quashed as  the customs authorities should have proceeded to recover the duty on the basis of the undertaking ...

Read More

Activity of digital offset & offset printing amounts to manufacture – Service Tax not payable

SRK Creative Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner Central Tax & GST (CESTAT Mumbai)

The department had challenged the order passed by Tribunal, Mumbai wherein, the tribunal, inter alia, held that the activity of digital offset and offset printing amounts to manufacture and the same is classifiable under heading chapter 4911 of the Central Excise Tariff....

Read More

Service tax cannot be demanded on correct availment of abatement and for discharging the tax liability for ‘Installation of thermal insulation’ under ‘Works Contract Service’

Rudra Engineering Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

CESTAT Held that, installation of ‘thermal insulation’ is a covered under definition of Works Contract Service & therefore, Service Tax is not demandable....

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (6,283)
Company Law (8,881)
Corporate Law (11,292)
Custom Duty (9,773)
DGFT (4,927)
Excise Duty (5,024)
Fema / RBI (5,405)
Finance (5,902)
Income Tax (44,232)
SEBI (4,772)
Service Tax (4,183)

Search Posts by Date

February 2023