CESTAT Ahmedabad held that there is no requirement of the actual use of inputs and quantities of imported goods for claiming DFIA i.e. Duty-Free Import Authorization benefit.
CESTAT Chennai held that benefit of exemption Notification no. 102/2009-Cus dated 11.09.2009 for capital goods imported under Zero Duty Export Promotion Capital Goods (EPCG) scheme available as there is no simultaneous availment of benefit under Status Holder Incentive Scheme (SHIS).
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that Medicament Supplies to Government Hospitals and Institutional Buyers shall be valued in terms of Section 4 and not Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
CESTAT Delhi held that imposition of service tax on composite works contract prior to 1st July 2007 i.e. prior to introduction of works contract service is unjustified and untenable in law.
CESTAT Delhi held that Cenvat Credit in respect of capital goods parts/spares/components received in the factory of the manufacturer and used in manufacture of dutiable final product is duly eligible.
A ruling from the CESTAT Chennai holds that the manufacture of non-marketable sugar syrup is not subject to excise duty, setting a new precedent in tax law.
CESTAT Mumbai held that waste or rubbish, which is thrown up in the course of manufacture, cannot be said to be a produce of manufacture and cannot be said to be exigible to excise duty. Hence, sale of Ferric Oxide which emerged through chemical reaction of Waste Pickle Liquor is not liable to any duty.
CESTAT Kolkata held that there was no proposal to demand service tax under ‘Cargo Handling Service’ in the Notice, however, in the impugned order the adjudicating authority classified the services under ‘Cargo Handling Service’. Hence, adjudicating authority has travelled beyond the scope of the Notice, which is legally not sustainable.
An insightful analysis of the CESTAT Ahmedabad’s ruling in Magnam Netlink Pvt. Ltd. Vs C.C.E. & S.T case, emphasizing the legality of cenvat credit reversal on exempted services like “Trading”.
The case at hand pertains to the valuation of Lead Acid Batteries and the determination of whether these should be valued under Section 4 or Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The core question revolves around the charging status of the batteries and where the charging occurs.
