CESTAT Ahmedabad held that CENVAT Credit on ISD invoice issued without obtaining ISD registration is allowable as payment of service tax on services received not disputed.
Customs duty demand on the undervaluation of plastic granules or flakes of powder was quashed in the absence of corroborative evidence and the value declared by assessee was correct being a transaction value and therefore, no addition could be made.
Explore the CESTAT Ahmedabad verdict on Dhariwal Industries Ltd. vs. C.C.E. & C. – Anand, clarifying service tax liability on GTA services and cenvat credit entitlement.
In the case of Haver Ibau India Pvt. Ltd. vs. C.C.E. & S.T.-Vadodara-II, CESTAT Ahmedabad clarifies Rule 3(5B) application for cenvat credit. Full analysis and judgment.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that Nutritional Supplements classifiable under heading 2106 9099 fall under Serial No. 453 of Schedule III of the Notification 1/2017-IGST. Accordingly, IGST @18% is payable and not @28%. Accordingly, demand of differential custom duty unsustainable.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that higher redemption fine and penalty imposable as appellant is a repeated offender and is violating the Minimum Import Price (MIP) condition prescribed by DGFT frequently.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that restriction of CENVAT Credit on supplementary invoice is applicable only in case of sale of goods. In the present case, restriction of CENVAT Credit on supplementary invoice is not applicable as there is only a stock transfer.
A proprietorship firm and the partnership firm even though the said proprietor was one of the partner in the partnership firm, both could not be a related person under section 2(41) of the Companies Act,1956.
Read about the Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs. C.S.T. – Service Tax case, where the need for legal protection of intellectual property for tax liability is discussed.
CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that mis-declaration allegations without complete evidence and violation of natural justice cannot be upheld.
