CESTAT Ahmedabad quashes penalty on Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) due to lack of clarity on service tax liability. Learn more in this article.
Dive into the RKM Powergen vs. Customs case. Learn how project import benefits can’t be denied if the contract registration process began before the goods’ importation.
In a recent CESTAT Mumbai order, the eligibility of cenvat credit for bus transportation charges is discussed. Learn the key details and implications here.
An in-depth look at the CESTAT Mumbai ruling in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax-VI Vs Group M Media (I) Pvt. Ltd. concerning service tax on media volume discounts.
Dive into the legal complexities of the Commissioner of Customs Vs S K P Enterprises case (CESTAT Kolkata), which revolves around the import of restricted old and used clothing. Get insights on why CESTAT dismissed the appeal for enhanced fines.
Analyzing the landmark CESTAT Chandigarh case where Ludhiana Steel Rolling Mills successfully appealed against a Central Excise demand for Rs. 82,20,602. Find out why the Court sided with the appellant.
CESTAT Chennai held that remand order of de novo adjudication being passed after 18 years is liable to be set aside as department failed to explain the humongous delay.
Analysis of CESTAT Chandigarh’s ruling in S. R. Medical Agencies vs. Commissioner of Central Excise regarding service tax on BSNL commission. Learn about the implications.
CESTAT Chennai remanded the matter back for de novo adjudication as appellant couldn’t obtain specific documents due to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that demand under Clause (i) of Rule 6(3) i.e. payment of 5%/10% of the value of exempted goods unjustified as appellant rightly availed the option of sub-rule (3A) of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 i.e. reversal of proportionate cenvat credit attributed to exempted goods.
