Unpacking the CESTAT Delhi ruling on Gurukripa Yuvraj Veg & Non-veg Restaurant regarding service tax exemption based on AC facility. Key takeaways and implications.
CESTAT Chennai held that penalty u/s 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 imposable as CHA has abetted or facilitated, may be deliberate or negligent, an illegal attempted export of prohibited goods i.e. Red Sanders wood pillars and tops.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that as the service charges are based on metric tons of the goods handled and not on the basis of wages of laborers deployed for the job, the activity of the loading, unloading of goods at port, cutting of bags, spreading of zola, cleaning of jetty is classified under Cargo Handling Service.
CESTAT Mumbai dismisses Revenue’s application for review against DHL Lemuir Logistics, criticizes incorrect factual representation.
For issuance of SCN involving extended period of limitation, suppression has to be brought on record which has not been done in this case by revenue.
CESTAT Ahmedabad order on Pharmanza India Pvt Ltd vs C.C.E. & S.T. case. Understand why manufacturing of drugs is not subject to business auxiliary service tax.
CESTAT Ahmedabad in M D Engineers Vs C.C.E. & S.T. held that Service Tax penalty under Section 76 and 78 cannot be imposed simultaneously.
CESTAT Bangalore upholds customs redemption fine & penalty for importing second-hand ETL Liners, which are restricted under Foreign Trade Policy.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that merely on the basis of the bill of lading it cannot be inferred that the goods were originated from China as certificate of origin of Malaysia not proved wrong or fake.
Learn about the K S Enterprises vs. Commissioner of Customs appeal regarding denial of DFIA exemption. CESTAT Ahmedabad’s decision and analysis.
