CESTAT rules definitions and valuation mechanisms under central excise law must be applied strictly in accordance with its own statutory framework. Cross-references to provisions under income tax law, without fulfilling distinct conditions under Central Excise Act, cannot justify a reassessment of excise duty
CESTAT Mumbai sets aside CGST order against Mira Construction, remanding the case for fresh examination of service tax exemptions under works contract services.
CESTAT Chennai held that refund of excess duty paid is allowable since delay in filing of bill of entry was on account of system error. Thus, appeal of revenue dismissed and refund granted by lower authority upheld.
The aforementioned action by assessee implied that assessee had accepted the reassessment and enhancement. Consequently, the appropriate officer was not supposed to issue a speaking order in accordance with Section 17(5) of the Customs Act.
Burden of proving undervaluation lies with the customs authorities, and an importer’s acceptance of valuation does not, by itself, constitute valid evidence.
CESTAT Mumbai rules that VAT incentives under Goa’s NPV scheme are not part of the assessable value for excise duty. Demand against Alpha Industries set aside.
CESTAT Chennai rules Vividh Print Media eligible for concessional customs duty, citing SC precedent on retrospective application of error-correcting notifications
CESTAT Chennai rules against arbitrary rejection of declared import value, citing SC precedent in valuation dispute.
CESTAT Chennai sets aside the order in SLV Trading Co. case, remanding it for reconsideration of judicial precedents on redemption fine and penalties.
CESTAT Kolkata lowers SAIL’s customs penalty from ₹44 lakh to ₹2.25 lakh for delayed document filing in provisional assessments under Regulation 5.
