CESTAT Ahmedabad held that enhancement of import value merely on the basis of consent letter of the importer without following due process of law as contemplated u/s. 14 of the Customs Act read with Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 is unsustainable in law.
CESTAT Ahmedabad clarifies that minor discrepancies shouldn’t lead to recovery of customs refund if CA certifies stock report. Learn more about Santosh Timber Trading Co Ltd Vs C.C.
In Gujarat Guardian Ltd Vs C.C.E-Bharuch, CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that remuneration paid as commission to whole-time directors based on profit doesn’t constitute an employer-employee relationship, thus no service tax applies.
Read about the CESTAT Ahmedabads ruling in the case of Inox India P Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, affirming the exemption of service tax for authorized operations within SEZ.
Oasis Impex appeals CESTAT Ahmedabad’s reclassification of imported calcite powder. CESTAT rules against rejection without cogent reason. Details of the case explained.
Explore the significance of order communication in appeals provision, as clarified by CESTAT Ahmedabad in Ashapura Minechem Ltd. Vs C.C.-Jamnagar case, setting aside rejection orders.
CESTAT Ahmedabad dismisses customs duty demand on Jain Grani Marmo for excess weight in imported marble blocks, emphasizing trade practices and EOU rights.
Maersk Line India Pvt Ltd’s case on confiscated containers under Customs Notification analyzed by CESTAT Ahmedabad. Details on import, violation, and verdict.
Learn about Lyka Labs Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST case. CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled no penalty under Excise Act when CENVAT credit paid for exempted goods.
CESTAT Ahmedabad quashes service tax demand on software services provided to Emerson Process Management, citing extended period of limitation.
