CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that freight/insurance charges aren’t part of assessable value for excise duty. Detailed analysis & conclusions provided.
Delve into case of Tejal Construction vs. C.C.E. & S.T.-Surat-I as CESTAT Ahmedabad emphasizes necessity of accurate service classification for service tax demands.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that service of supply the manpower services provided to educational institutions is exempt from payment of service tax vide Sr. No. 9 of Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012.
Commissioner of C.E. & S.T.-Surat-i vs J K Motors case analyzed: Service tax not leviable on CNG kit installations without separate invoices. Detailed review of CESTAT Ahmedabad’s decision.
Read about Aspam Petronergy Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.-Kandla (CESTAT Ahmedabad) case where mis-declaration of country of origin didn’t impact valuation. Detailed analysis provided.
When the EDI system itself permitted assessee to pay the cess using the scrip, there could not have been suppression of facts etc. Therefore, a penalty under Section 114A of the Act is unsustainable, especially when the duty demand was otherwise time-barred.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that enhancement of import value merely on the basis of consent letter of the importer without following due process of law as contemplated u/s. 14 of the Customs Act read with Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 is unsustainable in law.
CESTAT Ahmedabad clarifies that minor discrepancies shouldn’t lead to recovery of customs refund if CA certifies stock report. Learn more about Santosh Timber Trading Co Ltd Vs C.C.
In Gujarat Guardian Ltd Vs C.C.E-Bharuch, CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that remuneration paid as commission to whole-time directors based on profit doesn’t constitute an employer-employee relationship, thus no service tax applies.
Read about the CESTAT Ahmedabads ruling in the case of Inox India P Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, affirming the exemption of service tax for authorized operations within SEZ.
