When the appellants have been given permission to clear the goods in DTA by the Development Commissioner (DC), the department cannot then vaguely allege that they are not similar goods.
Charge of clandestine removal and duty evasion was a serious charge having civil consequences upon the assessee. Such charge could not be confirmed unless there was sufficient corroborative evidence which lead to the inevitable conclusion of clandestine removal and only on the basis of third party evidence the charge of clandestine removal was not sustainable.
Hivelm Industries Vs Commissioner of G.S.T. and Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) It is not in dispute that the deemed export did not attract any Excise Duty and hence, it is not the duty of the appellant / taxpayer to repeatedly plead before the authorities that the project in which it was involved was a deemed […]
KEC International Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise Central Goods & Service Tax (Appeals) (CESTAT Delhi) The CESTAT, New Delhi in M/s. KEC International Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Central Goods & Service Tax (Appeals) [Excise Appeal No. 52907 of 2019 dated May 10, 2022] set aside the order passed by the Revenue […]
Reliance Industries Ltd Vs Commissioner Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Mumbai) The two issues that have been referred to the Larger Bench of the Tribunal are, therefore, answered in following manner: (i) The answer to the first issue would be: a. The Bombay High Court in Coca Cola India and Ultratech Cement has settled […]
Jethanand Rohra Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Mumbai) CESTAT held that As the goods are lying under seizure and subsequent confiscation by the Customs Department for more than two years, for no fault of the appellant, grant of waiver of detention and demurrage charges is appropriate and direct that the proper certificate shall be issued […]
C.C.E. & S.T.-Rajkot Vs Sanghi Industries Ltd (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Undisputedly, the guesthouse is used for operations of the factory. Nothing is available on record to show that guesthouse is used for any other purpose. In view of this fact, since guesthouse used for operations of factory which has direct nexus with factory which produces excisable […]
Raychem RPG Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) We are not in agreement with the findings recorded by the Commissioner on the issue of limitation. Undisputedly all the facts were in the knowledge of the revenue and in fact have been corresponded between the revenue and appellant since 1993. For the clearance of […]
Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) Brief facts are that the appellant had imported certain goods under Advance Authorization Scheme vide various licenses. As the Advance Authorization expired, the appellants were unable to fulfill their export obligation as stipulated in these licenses. They have paid appropriate duty and interest on the quantity […]
CESTAT held that the assistance rendered by the appellants to their member farmers in auctioning their agricultural produce does not tantamount to rendering any service classifiable under ‘Auctioneers’ Service’.
