Tribunal has held that suppression of the fact can not be alleged when the demand is raised on the basis of information appearing in Balance Sheet. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the Department is liable to be dismissed and we do so.
Adani Energy Ltd Vs C.S.T. Service Tax (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The Cenvat credit on input services was denied on the ground that the input services were also used in PNG Sale i.e. trading activity. Since the input services were not used for providing of output services, the Cenvat credit used in such activity was denied. We […]
Dishman Pharmaceutical & Chemicals Ltd. Vs C.S.T.-Service Tax (CESTAT Ahmedabad) As regard the service tax demand on stock exchange fees, we find that no documentary evidence was produced to show that this is a statutory levy and the appellant have paid as reimbursement. It appears that the Stock Exchange has charged fees to the appellant […]
Ingram Micro India Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (Exports)(CESTAT Chennai) It can be seen that the refund claim is rejected on the ground that the appellant has not produced the Chartered Accountant certificate to establish that the burden of 4% Additional Duty has not been passed on to another. In page 21 of the appeal […]
Chakra Special Trading Co. Pvt Ltd Vs C.C. Kandla (CESTAT Ahmedabad) It is settled law that the price of contemporeous goods cannot be applied invariably in each and every case. Before applying the enhanced comparable price varies circumtances need to be verified such as the quality of goods, quantity of goods, country of origin etc. […]
Nosch Labs Pvt Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Hyderabad) Section 113 of the Customs Act provides for confiscation of export goods i.e., goods attempted to be exported. It does not provide for confiscation of goods which have already been exported. The term ‘export goods’ is defined in Section 2(19) of the Customs Act as […]
CESTAT held that it was immaterial if the supplier of the item had wrongly classified the same since, the actual classification and the eligibility for CENVAT credit is dependent on the actual usage of goods and therefore CENVAT credit is admissible to the Appellant.
Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Vs Commissioner of Service Tax Delhi (CESTAT Delhi) In the present case, it is true that no service tax was chargeable on the activity of the appellant, viz., carrying the advertisements in its broadcast and telecast. Therefore, the Government cannot collect service tax. It is also true that Section […]
Tata Consumer Products Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore) From a perusal of the impugned Order-in-Appeal, I find that though the appellate authority has taken note of the claim of the appellant as regards the inadvertent/clerical error, but has not accepted on the ground that the same was not brought to the notice […]
Beverly Hills Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) After considering written submission of the appellant, the Adjudicating Authority vide impugned order has held that the appellant had attempted to clear goods imported vide Bill of Entry No. 6374054 dt. 14.05.2018 through non-notified ICD/ Port in violations of the provisions contained in Rule […]
