I am of the opinion that the Handheld Mixer are not liable to have a BIS compliance as mentioned in BIS Kitchen Appliances (Quality Control) Order, 2018. I am of the opinion that the Handheld Mixer are not liable to have a BIS compliance as mentioned in BIS Kitchen Appliances (Quality Control) Order, 2018
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs PKPN Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (CESTAT Chennai) The issue involved is whether appellant is liable to pay service tax on the commission paid to foreign agents under the reverse charge mechanism. The parties are referred to as “assesee” and “department” for the same of convenience. 2. The respondents are engaged […]
Mere dispatch of the order cannot be considered as service. The period of 2 months for filing the appeal has to reckon not from the date of order announced but from the date of receipt of said order by the assessee in terms of Section 35 of Central Excise Act, 1944.
Divya Sree R O W Projects Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore) After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that when the passenger lift was imported, it was classified under Chapter 84 and the Classification was accepted by the Department and once the classification […]
Microsoft Research Lab India Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore) CESTAT find that the appellant has given detailed justification for each of the impugned services involved in these two appeals with judicial precedents and the impugned services have been used by the appellant for rendering the output services. Further, I find that […]
WMW Metal Fabrics Limited Vs Commissioner, CGST (CESTAT Delhi) There is a distinction between the amount appropriated towards duty and amount deposited for payment of a duty. In a former case duty which has been levied and paid subsequently becomes the property of the Government and no person would be entitled to get it back […]
M/s. Sivamurugan Chit Fund (P) Limited Vs Commissioner of G.S.T. and Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) There is no doubt that Section 11B ibid. prescribes the period of limitation for filing the refund claim, but admittedly here, the application for refund was filed on 19.01.2018; the date of the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is […]
Principal Commissioner of Customs Vs M. D. Overseas Limited (CESTAT Delhi) In this case Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) had set aside the Assessment Order (AO) passed on the three Bills of Entry (BoE) with a further direction for re-assessment of the rate of Basic Customs Duty applicable on the given BoE to the Department. M/s M. […]
N A Jayaram Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Bangalore) I find that the only issue in the present case is whether the imposition of penalty under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the ground of abetment of falsely signed the invoices used for improper exportation is justified under law. Further, I find that […]
Emaar MGF Land Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise and CGST (CESTAT Delhi) M/s. Emaar MGF Land Ltd. (Appellant) has filed the current appeal for quashing Order-In-Original No. DLI-SVTAX-001-COM-054-16-17 dated March 31, 2017 (OIO) which confirmed recovery of Central Value Added Tax Credit “CENVAT Credit) along with interest and penalty under Section 73(1) of the […]
