CESTAT Chennai held that differential duty demand unsustainable as invoices for purchase of raw materials and invoices for clearances of finished products indicate that the appellant is an independent manufacturer.
Held that the ceiling of 20% under Rule 6(3)(c) is not applicable to capital goods and 17 input services specified under Rule 6(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
CESTAT Delhi held that confirmation of demand without identifying the common inputs used for both taxable as well as exempted services is unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
CESTAT allowed Export Oriented Unit (EOU) and financing company jointly to enjoy the benefit of no duty imports when imported goods used by EOU.
CESTAT Delhi held that demanding the duty drawback unsustained as payment for goods exported is duly supported by BRC and re-certified after verification by the Bank. Further, revenue has not brought on record any evidence relating to diversion of goods or return of any remittance.
CESTAT overturned order that required payment of Service Tax on expenses incurred for spares and materials used in provision of complimentary services during warranty period.
Analysis of CESTAT Mumbai case – Commissioner’s order lacking reasoning set aside, violating justice principles. Learn the details, issues, and the remand decision.
Explore the Network vs. Commissioner of Central Excise case – CESTAT Chandigarh ruling on penalty, service tax, and Section 80 benefits. Full analysis and order details.
Universal Packaging Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) The legality of availing Small Scale Industries (SSI) exemption without including the value of supplies to Merchant Exporters has been challenged in four appeals. The appellant, a manufacturer of Corrugated Carton Boxes, had availed the SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/2003. However, periodic show-cause notices were […]
Denial of CENVAT credit for non-registration of premises is not justified as per Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Further held that, when conditions like payment of tax and receipt of service are satisfied, in such case credit cannot be denied on the basis that the credit was availed few days before the payment of tax.
