An exploration of the CESTAT Ahmedabad’s dismissal of the Revenue’s appeal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise & ST Vs Galaxy Diesel, focusing on the demand for exempted service despite Cenvat Credit repayment.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that as appellant is not a service recipient, service tax cannot be demanded from the appellant under reverse charge mechanism (RCM) in case of bank charges paid by Indian Bank to Foreign Bank and reimbursed from the appellant.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that Granite Slabs is correctly classified under 21561200 and not under 68022390. Accordingly, the demand on this count is not sustainable hence, the same is set aside.
In a case between ArcelorMittal Projects India Limited and C.C.-Mundra, the CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal of the appellant, stating that the limitation period for refund calculation should be determined according to Section 9 and 10 of the General Clauses Act.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that services related to construction of roads etc. the Government authorities/ agencies are covered under Mega Exemption of Service Tax notification no. 25/2012-ST and hence demand unsustainable.
CESTAT Ahmedabad rules in Heena Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, activities like construction & fabrication as sub-contractor for bridges, railways, etc., not taxable under ‘Erection, Commissioning or Installation’ service, based on bona fide belief and reasonable grounds.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that the transaction value declared by the importer should form the basis of assessment unless the same is rejected, for reasons set out in Rules of Customs Valuation Rules.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that services of Construction of residential complex to the Municipal Corporation of Surat under Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission which is not liable to service tax.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that services availed in respect of effluent treatment plant for treatment of industrial waste is in relation to the overall manufacturing activity and hence CENVAT Credit is duly admissible.
Read the full text of the CESTAT Ahmedabad order in the case of Rajkot District Co Operative Bank Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST. The issue revolved around the liability to pay service tax on the commission received by the appellant from the Agriculture Insurance Company of India Limited. The order analyzes the applicability of an exemption notification and concludes that the appellant is eligible for the exemption, therefore not liable to pay service tax on the commission received.
