Lehman Brothers Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Mumbai) Merely because the appellant is still registered under the Companies Act and has not get the said registration cancelled does not mean that they are carrying out business activity. It is nowhere the case of the Revenue that […]
Explore the CESTAT Delhi ruling in Anheuser Busch InBev India vs. Commissioner. Learn about excisability, duty, and Notification No.67/95 implications.
Commissioner of Service Tax Vs N.P. Earth Movers Pvt. Ltd.(CESTAT Delhi) The records indicate that M/s Western Coalfield Ltd. had awarded a contract to the respondent for loading and transfer of coal from one place to another in the licensed area of its mines situated at Wani and Majri and it was noticed by the department […]
Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise Vs Manglam Build Developers Ltd. (CESTAT Delhi) We find that the appeal is filed by the Revenue under the wrong assumption that the maintenance deposit taken by the respondent from the buyers is to be utilized for maintenance of the complexes and any unutilized amount will be transferred to the […]
Scale Arts In Vs Commissioner of Customs (NS-IV) (CESTAT Mumbai) Difficulties, or commercial detriment, in complying with the sampling prescriptions is not justifiable ground for excluding the import consignment from the rigours of prescribed testing that is obligated on the importer by the Foreign Trade Policy. Indeed, the policy has afforded sufficient latitude for such […]
Hubergroup India Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT 1find that the lower authorities had not denied the cenvat credit on gardening service per se but on the ground that the appellant have not established that the garden is maintained for the purpose of Pollution Control. This reason of the lower authorities is […]
Once, the appellant have reversed the Cenvat Credit proportionately, they have opted for the reversal of proportionate credit then the Revenue cannot insist for some other option which the appellant has not opted for. As regard, non-filing of the declaration, which is only the procedural requirement. Due to lapse of procedural requirement, substantial benefit of proportionate reversal of Cenvat credit cannot be objected to.
Matrix Comsee Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT find that the limited issue to be decided that whether the Appellant is entitled for cenvat credit on Courier Service. I find that the Appellant claimed that the Courier Service was used for delivery of their export goods from their factory premises to the […]
Sitaram India Ltd. Vs Commissioner CE & CGST Division-E (CESTAT Delhi) It is observed that activity of collecting toll is covered under the negative list of services. The Appellant has been provided with the Fee Collection Rights i.e., the right to collect toll tax and not to provide any service on behalf of NHAI. Further, […]
Nu Vista Limited Vs Commissioner (Appeals) CGST, Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) It is not in dispute that prior to 01.03.2015 cess was leviable on manufactured goods, in addition to excise duty and the appellant had availed credit under the provisions of the Credit Rules on cess paid on procurement of goods and services. It is […]
