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.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that the Construction of Residential Complex under Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) Scheme and construction of residential housing for Gujarat State Police Housing Corporation Ltd. is not liable to service tax.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that value of bought out items supplied along with manufactured goods cannot be included in the assessable value of the manufactured goods.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that the product MIRACULAN which primarily contains Traicontanol 0.05% by weight is a product under the category of Insecticides and cannot be considered as the plant growth regulator.
Letter written by Central Excise Superintendent is a decision against which appeal lies before Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 35
Short issue involved in the present case for determination is as to whether appellant could suo motu take credit reversed during litigation
In case the goods are lost or destroyed by natural causes or by unavoidable accidents during handling or storage in the store room or other approved premises the duty cannot be demanded.
Only that amount can be appropriated which is actually demanded and confirmed by the authority as legitimate duty or dues.
Enhancement of value of imported goods based on NIDB data and circular issued by DGOV without rejecting declared value under Rule 12 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 is not proper.
