The Tribunal ruled that port dues collected from port users had already suffered service tax. Retention of a portion of those dues could not be subjected to tax again under another category.
CESTAT held that once Cenvat credit is reversed along with interest, it amounts to non-availment of credit, allowing the assessee to retain the benefit of the abatement notification.
The Tribunal held that customs authorities cannot discard the declared export price without valid reasons or evidence. Transaction value supported by invoices and BRC must normally be accepted.
The tribunal ruled that confiscation and penalties were not justified because the Chartered Engineer’s certificate confirmed that the imported goods matched the importer’s declaration.
CESTAT Hyderabad held that expenses incurred for travel and stay of foreign specialists cannot be included in the taxable value since they were not charged by the service provider as consideration.
The Tribunal held that renting a building for operating a hotel falls within the statutory exclusion under Section 65(105)(zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, the service tax demand on the leased hotel property was set aside.
The Tribunal held that once the Order-in-Original is set aside, the penalty imposed under that order cannot survive independently and must depend on the outcome of fresh adjudication.
The tribunal held that installation and HVAC works involved supply of materials such as piping and wiring on which VAT was paid. Therefore, the contracts qualified as works contract service and not pure service.
The Tribunal held that service tax liability cannot be determined merely from Form 26AS entries without examining the nature of services. It set aside a ₹47.96 lakh demand after finding that the services were exempt road and canal construction works.
The Tribunal ruled that statutory presumption of passing on duty must be rebutted with proper evidence. The refund claim must be reconsidered with supporting documents.
