Discover the implications of Section 1(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 in the case of Seville Products Ltd. vs Commissioner of Customs, Ludhiana. Uncover why the CESTAT Chandigarh sets aside the penalty imposed on an appellant located outside India.
Baldeep Singh Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) In the present case inspite of opportunity given, Revenue failed to produce the proof of delivery of the show cause notice. Further, from perusal of the order-in-original, I find that the Adjudicating Authority have not recorded satisfaction of service of show cause notice and have proceeded to […]
Get insights on Cenvat credit availability for workmen compensation insurance policy. Explore the CESTAT Hyderabad order and legal perspectives on the matter.
Rakesh Canteen Contractor Vs Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs & ServiceTax (CESTAT Delhi) The brief facts are that the appellant has been awarded canteen services contract from M/s Caparo Engineering India Limited, by way of running and managing their canteen located in their factory premises. The only issue involved in this appeal is under the facts […]
Technocraft Enterprise Vs C.C. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) We find that the essential dispute is if the product imported by the appellant falls under Chapter Heading 72249099 or Chapter Heading 73049000. The appellant is seeking classification of the product as semi-finished product of other alloy steel. it is seen that only product with solid section are classifiable […]
Balkrishna Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) Service in question i.e. renting of immovable property is very well covered in ‘means’ as well as ‘includes’ clause of the definition of the input service as given under Rule 2 (I) of Cenvat Credit Rule, 2004. This Rule allows Cenvat Credit of all such […]
Sundaram Packaging India Pvt.Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs, CGST & Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) Scope of Rule 6 is still with respect to the inputs/inputs services used in or in relation to the manufacture of exempted goods along with manufacture of non-exempted goods. Hence, irrespective, exempted goods include non-excisable goods in view of the amendment […]
Sikar Ex-Serviceman Welfare Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs Commissioner Central Excise and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The final submission of appellant is that once the penalty has been imposed upon an organisation, simultaneous imposition of penalty on the office bearers thereof, is not sustainable. We observe in view of the definition of company in Section 3 […]
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited Vs Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit (CESTAT Delhi) It is a fact that out of the total amount of CENVAT credit of Rs. 4,99,32,736/- that has been disallowed claiming it to be for purchase of towers falling under Chapter 73. However, an amount of Rs. 4,90,91,607/- consisted […]
D.S. Cargo Agency Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) No doubt, there is no document on record as provided by the Department, burden to prove otherwise rests upon the Department but it is settled principle of law that the appellants admission are the best proof which need no further proof. Hence, the burden need not […]
