Commissioner of Central Excise & ST Vs Gujarat Heavy Chemicals Limited (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT find that appeal can be disposed of only on threshold point that whether the entire case involves the Revenue neutrality or otherwise. There is no dispute that all the goods on which the duty was demanded have been imported duly paid […]
Praveg Communications India Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad) In the present case, the appellant’s activity being of setting-up of stalls for exhibition or events cannot be considered to be classified under Interior Decorator’s service for the reason that there is neither any element of beautification of space nor any provision […]
Ghasiram Gokulchand Vs C.C. Jamnagar (CESTAT Ahmedabad) In the instant case, CESTAT find that the genuineness of the MoA dated 22.11.2012 has not been doubted. It is also noted that the LDT mentioned in the MoA dated 05.11.2012 between Ace Exim Pvt. Ltd. and Alang Auto & Gen. Engg. Pvt. Ltd. was not found to […]
Pvn Fabrics Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) As regard the demand of duty on cylinder used for printing of packaging material, we find that though the invoice was issued for sale of cylinder but the same was not cleared from the factory and the same was used within the factory since it is used […]
CESTAT observe that pre-delivery inspection charges are includible in the assessable value when such pre-delivery inspection is mandatory and an essential condition for the sale of the goods
No service tax on Mandap Keeper Service in respect of corporate booking of rooms where conference hall is provided as a complementary service.
Adjudicating Authority has not committed any error while holding that Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 cannot be invoked to sanction the refund of unutilized Cenvat credit lying with the appellant much prior to April, 2017 that too in cash as per Section 140 of CGST Act, 2017.
CESTAT held that since there is no suppression of fact, demand of extended period is not sustainable. Penalty imposed was unwarranted
CESTAT Chennai held that there is no Service Tax liability as and when the construction of flat is for the personal use of the service recipient.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that no hard and fast rule can be laid down for fixing quantum of redemption fine but the same has to be done, depending upon facts and circumstances of each case
