M/s Nektar Therapeutics (India) Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Hyderabad) The short issue, therefore, arising for our consideration is whether the reimbursement of salary paid to the ‘secondee’, to the parent company, Nektar USA amounted consideration for provision of manpower recruitment and supply agency services, within the meaning […]
Wintech Taparia Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) The appellant has not contended that it is not rendering a service under the category BAS. What is, however, contended by the appellant is that the services rendered by the appellant qualify as export of service under the 2005 Rules and, therefore, the appellant would not […]
Unibourne Food Ingredients LLP Vs C.C.-Jamnagar (Prev) (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Customs: Exporter not required to give declaration of technical specification, quality & characteristics of inputs used in resultant product As per Policy Circular No. 72/2008 dated 24.03.2009, flexibility has been given to import alternative inputs or goods which are capable of using in the export product. […]
Ford India Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) At paragraph 41 of the Show Cause Notice, it is inter alia recorded that M/s. Ford India Pvt. Ltd. have been constantly mis-declaring the description; that they have not only mis-declared but also misled the Customs; that the invoice descriptions themselves do not correctly represent […]
Bengal Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs CGST & Excise, Howrah (CESTAT Kolkata) In the instant case, the only dispute herein is for payment of remuneration in the nature and form of commission based on percentage of profit to whole time directors, which is a fact on record. Section 2(94) of Companies Act, 2013, duly defines ‘whole-time […]
Power Build Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Warranty Service which implies that the value is already included in the sale price of the goods. Moreover, there is no requirement in the definition of Input Service that the value is to be included in the assessable value for the purpose of Central Excise […]
It has been consistently held that sales commission fall under definition of ‘input service’. By following the ratio of the above said decisions, we hold that denial of CENVAT Credit on sales commission is not sustainable in law.
Kandhari Beverages P Ltd Vs C.C.E. (CESTAT Chandigarh) In the case before High Court, the advertisement expenses were incurred by Coca Cola India and High Court had held that expenses towards advertisement services are part of the cost incurred for production of the finished product, and hence these services are to be treated as input […]
Religare Technova Global Solutions Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Bangalore) Conclusion: Since the activities undertaken by assessee were covered under the Information Technology Services as taxable under Section 65(105)(zzzze) with effect from May 16, 2008 and prior to 16-5-2008, even the services rendered by assessee was excluded from the scope of consulting engineer’s […]
ST – Where Cenvat credit wrongly taken is subsequently reversed, it is tantamount to non-availment of credit – Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules (CCR)is inapplicable in such circumstances: CESTAT Kolkata
