Patodia Filaments Pvt Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT find that notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004 is not an absolute notification but a conditional notification issued under section 5A. The notification has the condition of non availment of cenvat credit. The sub-rule (3) (i) and (ii) of Rule 11 of the […]
CESTAT Mumbai held that offence of money-laundering committed by an individual with a deliberate design with the motive to enhance his gains, disregarding the interests of nation and society as a whole and which by no stretch of imagination can be termed as offence of trivial nature.
Bharat Hotels Vs Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) (CESTAT Delhi) Conclusion: Demand could be made under Undertaking only when Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) found that use of aircraft was not in accordance with permit granted. Where DGCA had not initiated any proceedings against assessee and in fact had renewed the permit from time to […]
HC held that, procedural lapses cannot be a ground for denying substantive benefits to assessee. Further held that, Show Cause Notice issued before the passing of such order was barred by limitation.
CESTAT Chennai held that imposition of penalty u/s 112(a) on the customs broker alleging mis-declaration of goods is unsustainable as customs broker cannot be expected to have knowledge about the goods in the container as there is no dispute with regard to KYC document of the importer.
CESTAT held that, once assessee had reversed proportionate credit attributed to exempted goods, no demand of 10% of value of goods can be raised by Revenue Department.
When the test reports were available on record, there was no need to go to the website and Wikipedia for the meaning of the product.
Rule 11(3) Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 Bar of credit lapsing applicable only when assessee availed absolute exemption & not on conditional one
There is no error in the finding recorded by the Commissioner in this regard, as indeed the appellant did try to evade payment of service tax by treating the amount as a security deposit when in fact it was clearly an advance, which fact was very specifically mentioned in the Agreement. The intention to evade payment of service tax by suppression of material facts is writ large.
Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 ibid deals with imposition of mandatory penalty in certain cases. As per the Customs Act it is the importer who is to file the bill of entry to the proper officer u/s. 46 ibid while importing the goods and the assessment has to be made on that bill of entry and on such assessment, the duty is levied
