Tribunal held that the foreign service provider being not covered under the term ‘Telegraph Authority’, the service provided by them will not fall under the definition of ‘Telecommunication Service.
Faizan Texturising Vs C.C.E. Bharuch (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Facts-The appellant is a 100% EOU engaged in the manufacture of Polyester Texturised Yarn and Polyester Twisted Yarn. Their factory was visited by the officers on 21.04.2003, who conducted various checks and verifications. As a result, shortage of 7618 kg. imported raw material viz. “Bright Polyester Spin Draw […]
Neno Crystal Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import) (CESTAT Mumbai) It would not be inappropriate to mention here that the Appellant’s case is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Commissioner of Customs (Sea), Chennai-I Vs. M.R. Associates cited supra wherein it was clearly held that enhancement of value based on voluntary statement […]
J J Patel & Brothers Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The issue under consideration is that whether the Appellant are liable to pay Service tax on reimbursement of electricity charges received from the service recipient M/s Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. We find that identical issue involving under the identical contract has been decided by […]
Rajasthan Financial Corporation Vs Commissioner of CGST (CESTAT Delhi) Learned Commissioner (Appeals) had failed to appreciate the facts of the case as it is a case of refund of penalty paid by the appellant where he has considered that it is a case of refund of duty. As facts of the case are crystal clear […]
Varun Beverages Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & CX (CESTAT Kolkata) I find that the sales commission is directly attributable to sales of the products. Any activity which amounts to sale of the products is deemed to be sales promotion activity in the normal trade parlance. The commission paid on sales of the products/services with […]
The appellant had taken industrial lands on long term lease from Kerala Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation by paying an upfront amount on long term lease, along with service tax. Thereafter, with the insertion of Section 104 into Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 with retrospective effect, the appellants requested for refund of the service tax paid by them on the upfront amount on long term lease of industrial lands.
We find there are different judicial forums who has held that high consumption of electricity by itself not a ground to infer suppression of production. The onus is on the department to prove allegation of clandestine removal with positive and concrete evidence.
Goyal and Co Construction Pvt Ltd Vs C.S.T. Service Tax (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Facts- The appellant is engaged in providing Construction of Residential Complex & Construction of Commercial Complex Service and Real Estate Service. On the basis of information, an enquiry was initiated. Accordingly, revenue directed the appellant to produce documents/ details and information related to […]
United Spirits Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Taxes (CESTAT Bangalore) CESTAT find that the adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand in respect of various fees paid to the State Government in respect of manufacture, import and sale of alcoholic liquor. The adjudicating authority, though dropped the demand on licence fee, but confirmed the demand on […]
