Sai Pooja Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT observed that the taxable services in relation to provisions of Outdoor Caterer is defined under Section 65 of the Finance Act 1994 and attracting payment of service tax on the provisions of such services. However we find that there is Exemption vide […]
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that the coverage and taxability of foreign agent service which are alleged to have been received outside India needs proper examination and hence directed for de novo adjudication
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that as excise duty is levied on the entire value of supply of machinery. Hence, service tax cannot be demanded separately on activity of erection, commissioning and installation of the said machinery.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that service provided to Gujarat Energy Transmission Corporation Ltd. are exempted from the payment of service tax in terms of Notification No. 45/2010–ST dated 20.07.2010
Explore the CESTAT Ahmedabad decision in Amar Cold Storage’s favor. DGFT clarification on DEPB entry Sr.No.2/66 prevails, reversing Customs Department.
Variety Lumbers Pvt. Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The refund claim was admittedly not filed within the period of one year as prescribed in paragraph 2 of clause C of Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007 and the same stands filed within a period of one year from the date of order of Hon’ble […]
CESTAT held that the Service Tax is not liable to be paid on the amount collected from the customer as interest free security deposit against trading of shares which is subsequently refunded without utilization.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that duty not leviable on scrap which is neither generated from the manufacturing nor generated from the cenvatable input or capital goods.
Shree Keshariyaji Metal Impex Vs C.C. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) CESTAT find that as regard the classification of goods that whether the same is Aluminium Scrap or Aluminium Sheet, the assessment was made on the basis of the department’s claim and the appellant have paid the duty. The said assessment was not challenged by the appellant therefore at […]
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that absolutely no indication as to how the amount received by the appellant from PGVCL would qualify as Business Auxiliary Service. Only bland allegation without any substantiation cannot be upheld.
