As appellant had not taken registration and had not filed ST-3 returns within the prescribed time, penalty imposed under Section 77 was justified.
t is settled law that if the assessee has not received the amount from the buyers, it cannot be held, that the Appellant will be unjustly enriched.
OSI Systems Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Hyderabad) The brief facts are that the appellant was an assessee under the service tax regime and they migrated to GST regime and they also filed TRAN-1 for taking forward the credit which was lying in their Cenvat credit register. Subsequently, it was pointed out […]
Manikgarh Cement Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) As could be noticed from para 24 of the Order-in-Original, the adjudicating authority had observed that Welding Electrodes and D.A. Gas were used in the cement manufacturing plant of the Appellant for the purpose of repair and maintenance of its plant and machinery. This being observation […]
CESTAT Hyderabad held that CENVAT Credit of service tax paid on premium for medical insurance of employees and their families is eligible.
CESTAT Kolkata held that CENVAT Credit of steel items used for the purpose of setting up of coal washery plant is available applying the user test principle.
CESTAT Mumbai held that used mild steel (MS) plates industrial significance only as waste and scrap which is the feedstock for melting in furnaces and hence classifiable as waste and scrap.
CESTAT Mumbai held that when cenvat credit of only that quantity of input is availed which was intended for use in the manufacture of dutiable goods, there is no question of invoking provisions of rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004
CESTAT Mumbai held that the provisions of service to the overseas entity by an entity situated abroad does not merit liability under section 66A of Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, set aside tax recovery from M/s Singapore Airlines as deemed provider of online information data base access or retrieval service.
CESTAT Chennai held that when goods are held not confiscatable under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, then it can be reasonably held that the import was not prohibited.
