Bochasanwasi Shri Aksharpurushottam Swaminarayan Sansths Vs C.C. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) As regard the second issue i.e. rate of interest, the rate of interest is statutorily prescribed under section 27(A) read with Notification issued there under according to which 6% as rate of interest was prescribed. The departmental officer is bound to follow the statutory provision strictly […]
-We find that the ‘Commercial training/ education/ coaching’ provided by the appellant imparts skills to the students/ trainees to enable them to seek employment or undertake self-employment directly upon completion of the course.
CESTAT Delhi held that mere failure to pay Excise Duty, not due to fraud or wilful misstatement is not sufficient to attract the extended period of limitation and the Central Excise Officer should have issued notice within one year from the relevant date.
CESTAT Kolkata orders provisional release of seized goods. Apex International vs Commissioner of Customs. Guidelines considered. Full text of CESTAT order.
Trading Syndicate Proprietor – Shri Mohinder Goel Vs Commissioner of Customs(Port) (CESTAT Kolkata) present proceeding was initiated against the appellant on the allegation that the goods imported by him had been undervalued. It is on record that the bills of entry were assessed by the Proper Officer and the assessable value was determined by him and […]
Deify Infrastructures Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Delhi) The Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (“CESTAT”) in the matter of M/s. Deify Infrastructures Limited v. Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs [Final Order No. 51927/2021 dated October 27, 2021], held that the value of […]
Hon’ble CESTAT, Kolkata Bench, vide its Order No. 75689/2021 dated 10.11.2021 has pronounced its judgement on a very important and vexed issue, in favour of the assessee, which will benefit many Corporates which have received similar demand notices for levy of Service Tax on the compensation amount received by them, consequent to cancellation of coal blocks by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2014, by invoking the provisions of Section 66E(e) of the Finance Act, 1994.
Inox Leisure Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Hyderabad) Appellant exhibits/ screens the movies provided by the distributor – consideration is paid by the appellant to the distributor based on the agreed percentage – department demanded service tax considering the same as BSS – Held no service tax can be levied on the appellant […]
Synthokem Labs Pvt Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Hyderabad) The only issue remains now is as to whether the case in hand was merely a case of wrong apportionment of credit between the appellants both units, a bonafide clerical error or it was a case of intentional malafide intention to evade payment of […]
Sherly Sany Vs C.C, Cochin (CESTAT Bangalore) It is arbitrary not to give option to pay fine in lieu of confiscation to the person in possession of Gold While quashing an order of the customs authorities, CESTAT, Bangalore held that the order of confiscation without offering an option to pay fine to the person in […]
