Analysis of C.C. Ahmedabad vs Smaltochimia India Pvt Ltd case involving customs duty classification dispute for ‘Twin Vision Scanner’ and related equipment.
CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that CENVAT credit of excise duty is allowable even when 5% of the value of exempted goods is reversed, complying with Rule 6(3)(i) of CENVAT Credit Rules.
CESTAT Bangalore ruled that a refund cannot be rejected when taxpayer provides adequate documents to prove service tax payment and non-availment of CENVAT credit.
CESTAT Kolkata grants relief to Tata Motors, quashing denial of CENVAT credit on excise duty due to genuine disclosure of transporters’ copy of invoice.
Analysis of Surin Automotive vs CESTAT Chennai case. CESTAT’s decision that bill discounting facility is taxable not only by banks but also by a body corporate.
Analysis of Hero Motocorp Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Excise case. CESTAT Chandigarh allows CENVAT credit on helmet locks supplied with motorcycles as accessories.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that penalty on mediator acting as a broker in dealing with trading of advance licence which was forged or obtained fraudulently unjustified as it is not established that he was aware about forged/ fake nature of licence.
CESTAT Chennai directs reconsideration of customs duty on imported aluminium powder by Metal Powder Company Ltd., citing lack of speaking order.
CESTAT Chennai ruled no service tax is leviable on ABC Consultants Pvt. Ltd. for reimbursement of advertisement charges following precedent.
CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that services received outside SEZ are eligible for a refund of Service Tax under Notification No. 09/2009-ST dated 03.03.2009 as amended by Notification No. 15/2009-ST dated 25.05.2009, in Zydus Hospira Oncology case.
