Lancor Holdings Limited Vs The Commissioner of G.S.T. and Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) There is no dispute as to the eligibility or otherwise for refund except the claim being rejected as barred by limitation. There is also no dispute that both the service provider and the service recipient having merged into a single entity, there […]
The issue under consideration is whether denial of CENVAT credit availed by the appellant for construction/setting up of landfill is justified in law?
Classic Marble Company Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Mumbai) In this case The learned adjudicating authority has rejected the declared value in respect of the subject Bills of Entry under Section 14(1) ibid read with Rule 12 ibid and re-determined the assessable value under Section 14(1) ibid read with Rule 3(1) ibid, holding that sufficient […]
The issue under consideration is regarding rejection of refund claimed by the appellant being service tax paid for the services received in the SEZ.
Metlife India Insurance Company Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Bangalore) CESTAT Bengaluru has held that Cenvat credit of service tax paid under reverse charge mechanism for availing services of insurance agents was available in a case when a portion of the premium amount (consideration towards output service), in case of ULIP policies, was […]
Shiroki Auto Components India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT Ahmedabad has held that the child parts imported by the appellant are classifiable under Tariff Item 9401 90 00 as parts of vehicle seats as declared by the importer-assessee and not under Tariff Item 8708 99 00 as parts […]
The issue under consideration is regarding rejection of claim for refund of the service tax under Section 11B.
Mahanadi Coalfields Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & CX (CESTAT Kolkata) The only issue involved in this appeal is whether the appellant is liable to deposit service tax under Security Service under reverse charge when the entire service tax amount has been reimbursed to the service provider who has deposited the same with the Govt. […]
Kaizen Organics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) I find that the allegations in the show cause notice of taking irregular cenvat credit is based on a communication dated 30.02.2012 received from the Additional Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise, J & K, Jammu, stating that the several units in […]
Bio Gen Extracts Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Bangalore) We find that the appellant initially exported Phycocyanin and a part quantity of the same was rejected for quality reasons which was re-imported by him without payment of duty in terms of Notification No. 158/95-Cus dated 14.11.1995 on executing Bond with Bank Guarantee. We […]
