CESTAT Delhi held that when a government company is involved there will be a rebuttable presumption regarding nonexistence of any of the ingredients mentioned in the proviso to section 73(1) of the Finance Act. Accordingly, extended period of limitation couldn’t be invoked.
CESTAT Delhi held that as electricity is not excisable goods under section 2(d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 hence rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules (CCR) would not be applicable.
CESTAT Delhi held that if tax is payable under RCM, however, service provider has duly collected the service tax and deposited the same to the Government. Demanding service tax under RCM from the service receiver will amount to double taxation and hence such demand not sustainable.
CESTAT Delhi held that Clad with compatible non-clad aluminium foil didn’t had any commercial supplies in the domestic industry during the period of investigation and hence anti-dumping duty on the same is not leviable.
In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court clarified that construction services provided by cooperative housing societies to members are not subject to service tax.
CESTAT Ahmedabad exempts IPL player Ajitesh Kamlesh Argal from service tax on remuneration, setting a precedent on employment vs brand promotion in sports.
Hair Transplant is neither undertaken to restore or reconstruct anatomy or its functions, nor the procedure of hair transplant restores developmental abnormalities degenerative diseases, injury or trauma. We find that hair transplant is a medical procedure to improve outer look of the body for time being and it does in any way contributes to the anatomy or functions of human body.
Shairu Gems Diamonds Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of Service Tax-IV (CESTAT Mumbai) CESTAT find that the learned Commissioner at paragraph 2 has referred to the show cause notice dated 21.08.2012 having been issued to the appellant, seeking confirmation of service tax demand for the period 2008 to 2012. He has also recorded that the said […]
CESTAT held that unless CENVAT Credit availed by the appellant has not been recovered by way of issue of show cause notice invoking Rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the CENVAT Credit available on the books of account cannot be rejected when it is accumulated on account of export of Service.
CESTAT Delhi held that as domestic industry doesn’t manufacture/produce colour coated coil, anti-dumping duty cannot be imposed on the same.
