CESTAT Ahmedabad held that all the services provided in relation to power transmission is exempted from service tax as per notification 45/2010-ST.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that rejection of transaction value is unjustified as department has failed to produce any evidence reflecting that the relationship between the parties has influenced the price.
CESTAT Kolkata has held that Custom Broker License suspended under Regulation 16(1) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 for around a month is directed to be lifted as necessary inquiry should have completed during the said suspension time.
Caravel Logistics Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) Handbook of Procedures issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) dated 08.04.2005 (2004-09) requires, at paragraph 2.32, in the case of import in the form of metallic waste, scrap, etc., referred to therein, the furnishing of pre-shipment inspection certificate at the time of […]
In this case findings of the Adjudicating Authority, clearly exonerates this appellant from the penal action under Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, for the reason that there was no material on record to prove that the appellant had submitted the fake gate pass.
Service provided by a company in India to its Hundred percent holding company abroad cannot be considered as an establishment of a distinct person and therefore such services would be export of services.
Icon Industries Vs Commissioner, CGST (CESTAT Delhi) Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme (SVLDRS) was introduced by way of Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 by the Central Government. The main objective of the scheme is to provide for the settlement of pending disputes related to indirect taxes. The Appellant although applied under the said scheme […]
CESTAT find that, had the appellant not utilized the Cenvat credit of EC & SHEC for payment of output tax/duty in December 2016, the same would have become refundable as on 30/06/2017.
CESTAT Mumbai held that amended rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 prescribes the formula for claiming refund of service tax by the service provider. Under such amended rule in vogue, there is no requirement of satisfying the nexus between the input service and the output service and hence order rejecting refund claim for the finding on nexus is not in accordance with law.
CESTAT Chennai held that as the debit note doesnt contain the nature of taxable service provided by the other party to the appellant, such debit note cannot be considered a valid document as per Rule 9 of CCR, 2004 and hence CENVAT Credit ineligible.
