CESTAT Ahmedabad held that supplying labour doesn’t qualify as ‘Cargo Handling Services’. The goods do not become cargo as any movement of goods within the factory does not make it a cargo.
Messrs Mahasagar Travels Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that both the appellants are engaged in the inter-state and intra-state transportation of passengers and registered as Tour Operators and paying service tax in normal course of their business. However, Notification No. 20/2009-ST dated […]
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that the term ‘permanently’ in 4th Proviso to rule 9 of Pan Masala Packing Machine Rules is clearly related to a particular month and not forever.
Agriculture Produce Market Committee Vs C.CGST & CEx- Gandhinagar (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The issue involved in the present case is that whether the appellant, Agriculture Produce Market Committee (APMC for short) is liable to pay service tax on the rent recovered towards renting of shops, godown, office etc. to the commission agents/ traders under the head […]
Appellants claimed that services provided by them not qualify as Manpower Supply Service’as it was a contract for job work on per piece basis
In case obligation under Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules is fulfilled in respect of the goods cleared under full exemption then benefit of Notification 67/1995-CE dated 16.03.1995 cannot be denied.
State Bank of India Vs C.C. E. & S.T.–Surat (CESTAT Ahmedabad) find that the services provided by the appellant are in relation to the disbursement of EPF and ESI. Notification No. 13/2004-ST dated 10.09.2004 provides following exemption: “…. exempts taxable service provided by a banking company or a financial institution including a non-banking financial company, […]
Deep Industries Limited Vs C.S.T. Service Tax (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The limited question needs to be answered in this matter is whether interest on the amount of Cenvat credit availed but not utilized is recoverable or otherwise. The recovery of interest on the inadmissible Cenvat credit has been directed under Rule14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, […]
No adjustment on account of a different assessable value adopted at Pipavav Port cannot be made in the refund amount as the import and clearance made at Pipavav Port is an independent clearance made by different Assessing Officers.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that amount charged as freight and handling charges which are separately shown in the invoices cannot be included in the assessable value under section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
