Explore the CESTAT Ahmedabad ruling on Bright Performance Nutrition’s IGST dispute with customs. Detailed analysis of classification and IGST rate implications.
The impugned order detailed the efforts made by the revenue authority to provide the necessary documents and opportunities for cross-examination. It concluded that the appellant’s delay in cross-examination was merely a tactic to delay the adjudication process. The order upheld the revised report of Shri N J Lalwani and confirmed the demand of duty.
Read the detailed analysis of the CESTAT Ahmedabad order in the case of Hamon Shriram Cottrel Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner of C.E. & S.T.-Vapi. No service tax can be demanded on sale of goods or by including the value of goods in the service.
Read the detailed analysis of Hamilton Housewares Pvt Ltd Vs C.C. Ahmedabad case where CESTAT Ahmedabad allows refund of 4% SAD, despite procedural disputes.
CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that freight/insurance charges aren’t part of assessable value for excise duty. Detailed analysis & conclusions provided.
Delve into case of Tejal Construction vs. C.C.E. & S.T.-Surat-I as CESTAT Ahmedabad emphasizes necessity of accurate service classification for service tax demands.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that service of supply the manpower services provided to educational institutions is exempt from payment of service tax vide Sr. No. 9 of Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012.
Commissioner of C.E. & S.T.-Surat-i vs J K Motors case analyzed: Service tax not leviable on CNG kit installations without separate invoices. Detailed review of CESTAT Ahmedabad’s decision.
Read about Aspam Petronergy Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.-Kandla (CESTAT Ahmedabad) case where mis-declaration of country of origin didn’t impact valuation. Detailed analysis provided.
When the EDI system itself permitted assessee to pay the cess using the scrip, there could not have been suppression of facts etc. Therefore, a penalty under Section 114A of the Act is unsustainable, especially when the duty demand was otherwise time-barred.
