CESTAT Mumbai held that confirmation of differential duty necessarily has interest liability appended to it Accordingly liability to pay interest on duties short-paid at the time of clearance of goods for captive consumption does not get erased.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held the eligible cenvat credit of service tax paid during setting up of the factory is duly available as without use of such service the appellant could not have possibly manufactured the excisable goods.
CESTAT Mumbai held that demand under the provisions of Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 unsustainable as number of installed machines before and after replacement of machines remained same.
CESTAT, Chennai, ruled that customs brokers cannot be held liable for the undervaluation of goods. The court held that the valuation of goods is determined by the contract between the exporter and importer, and customs brokers do not have any influence in this matter.
Divya Yog Man Dir Trust Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) The demand under this head was made only against the appellant Divya Yog Mandir Trust on the amount received by it from M/s. Rajashri Media Pvt. Ltd. for grant of exclusive rights to all audio, visual, audio-visual and text materials of Divya Yog […]
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that reverse charge not applicable on bank charges in respect of the foreign currency transaction between their local foreign banks engaged in facilitating the transfer of foreign exchange.
Cinepolis India Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of CGST (CESTAT Mumbai) These appeals of M/s Cinepolis India Pvt Ltd, against order-in-original no. MUM/CGST/MW/COMMR/AK/42-43/2020-21 dated 26th February 2021 of Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai West, arise from the unique deployment of constituents, that make up channel entities involved in exhibition of cinematographic films, in an arrangement by which […]
Messrs Dic Fine Chemicals Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.E (CESTAT Ahmedabad) As regard the issue that whether the refund claim can be rejected on the ground that the input services on which the refund claim was made by SEZ is not approved by the approval committee. As per the facts of the present case the refund […]
KPG Enterprise Vs C.C.E. Jamnagar (prev.) (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The issue mainly involved is whether MEA S.O. 2158(E) dated 20.06.2016 prohibited the subject vessel imported for breaking purpose. The case of the department is that S.O. dated 20.06.2016 is issued in order to implement the UNSC resolutions and prohibited the subject vessel for entry into India […]
Reliance Mediaworks Ltd Vs Commissioner of GST (CESTAT Mumbai) The arrangement most commonly entered into between a theater owner and a distributor is that the theater owner screens the movie for fixed number of days under a contract. The proceeds earned through sale of tickets go to the distributor but the theatre owner receives a […]
