Minda D-Ten Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import) (CESTAT Delhi) The Bluetooth module receives radio frequency analog signals from other devices (like mobile phone), converts the radio frequency analog signals into digital signals and thereafter transmits the signals back to the Bluetooth module of mobile phone (in radio frequency signal form) or to the […]
Cipy Polyurethanes Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) The decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of BPL Display Devices Ltd [2004 (174) ELT 5 (SC)] clearly lays down that once the goods are procured for an intended use, then the benefit available and availed by them should not be denied […]
Case New Holland Construction Equipment (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) ‘Input service’ either prior to 01.04.2011 or w.e.f. 01.04.2011 means any service used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, or in relation to the manufacture of final products. The appellant is under an obligation to provide after sale service […]
Indore Treasure Market City Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner, CGST (CESTAT Delhi) We turn our attention to the other issues like time bar and availability of credit to the appellant. The appellant submits that it had been regularly filing the ST-3 Returns and as such nothing was suppressed by it so as to invoke of the […]
Chittor Polyfab Ltd. Vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Central Goods And Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The circular dated 08.06.2018 also cannot be made retrospectively applicable to the period in question (April 2015 to June, 2017). At the relevant time, circular No. 988/12/2014 CX dated 20.10.2014 / Circular No. 97/8/2007-CX dated 23.8.2007 were applicable. It has […]
Online Cargo Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT upheld validity of Order passed after 90 days under regulation 17(7) of CBLR, 2018 In the case of M/S Online Cargo v. Commissioner of Customs [CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 51120 OF 2020], the Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the CESTAT) passed an interim order […]
Appellant contended that accumulated credits of Cesses were not transitioned into GST regime due to specific restriction under Section 140(1) of CGST Act. Appellant therefore had to resort to the option of refund under existing law to avoid lapsing of credit.
Manoj Gadhiya Vs C.C. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) It is apparent that the appellant was fully aware about the fictitious nature of the importers as the documents were being fabricated with his knowledge. He also admitted that he had never met the importer but solely relied on the documents submitted by High Sea Seller. His defense seems […]
Kankariya Automobiles (P) Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Mumbai) From the records and narration of Learned Authorised Representative, it would appear that the appellant, an authorized dealer and service centre for motor vehicles, had provided space for insurance companies to solicit customers of insurance contracts on the vehicles sold by them. […]
Astrazeneca India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner Of Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore) Since the issue of interest on delayed refund has been settled by the apex court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. (supra) wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that interest on delayed refund under Section 11BB is payable on expiry of three months […]
