Assessee-company had not accepted the enhancement of the value as they had requested for passing a speaking order in terms of Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. Further viewed that Commissioner (Appeals) had not adduced any evidence in support of his finding that assessee had accepted the enhancement of the value of the goods, therefore, assessee should be given sufficient opportunity for presenting their defence and also personal hearing be given before passing a speaking order.
CESTAT Kolkata held that no service tax is leviable on Banking and Financial Institution Services prior to 16.07.2001. Accordingly, service tax not leviable on the agreements entered by the assessee with their clients prior to 16.07.2001.
CESTAT Delhi held that invocation of extended period of limitation unsustainable as several rounds of audit was conducted and show cause notice for previous period on the same issued was already issued. Hence, department was fully aware of the issue in the question.
Commissioner of Customs (Import) Vs Siya Paper Mart Pvt. Ltd. (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT Delhi held that the principles of judicial discipline require that the orders of the higher appellate authorities should be followed unreservedly by the subordinate authorities. Facts- Notification no. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007 has been issued to provide for refund of the SAD if […]
CESTAT Delhi held that the health care services are provided by the clinical establishments by engaging consultant doctors is exempted from service tax and cannot be taxed as business support service.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that penalty under rule 26 of Central Excise Rules rightly imposed on the Chartered Accountant who issued false performance certificate to fraudulent parties based on which fraudulent advance license were obtained.
CESTAT Kolkata held that cenvat credit is available in respect of iron and steel, cement, welding electrodes etc. used in manufacture of storage tank and pollution control system.
CESTAT Kolkata held that NIDB data cannot be relied upon when it is relating to different quantity and quality of goods. Further, enhancement of value based on LME prices untenable in view of unambiguous certificates from the manufacturers of the impugned goods.
CESTAT Chennai held that in case of Inter-unit transfer of goods for captive consumption, the actual cost of production (100% of the cost of production), of the raw material procured from the Bhadrachalam unit of the appellant [excluding the notional loading under Rule 8 – 15% / 10%] is the cost of raw material in the hands of the Chennai unit
CESTAT Delhi held that manual breast pump has nothing to do with any medical or surgical procedures nor is it used by any medical practitioner hence the same is classifiable under CTH 39269090.
