In present facts of the case, while dismissing Revenue Appeals it was held by the Hon’ble Tribunal that it is impossible to maintain separate account in respect of Input and input services received and used in the manufacture of LPG, as there is no intention to use the particular input and input services in a particular quantity used for manufacture of LPG. Further, it was also held that CENVAT Credit is also admissible in respect of the amount of inputs contained in any of the waste, refuse or by-product.
Meera Pipes Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.E. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Conclusion: In present facts of the case, it was observed that cross examination of witness is mandatory in terms of Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Also, it was observed that private notebook relied on without recording statements and its authors there was no legally […]
Base oil SN50 could not be classifiable as High-Speed Diesel (HSD) in absence of any conclusive evidence to hold that the imported product was only HSD and it could be used as Automotive Fuel, the imported base oil in question could not be reclassified as HSD.
P K Exim Vs C.C. -Mundra (CESTAT Ahmedabad) It is settled law that, irrespective of whether the classification claimed by the appellant is correct or not since the classification proposed by the Revenue is absolutely incorrect, the entire case of the Revenue will not sustain. Further In view of the settled legal position the test […]
Gujarat Alkalies And Chemicals Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) There was an interpretation that whether the portion of contribution recovered from the employee, the Cenvat credit there on can be allowed or not and the said issue has been settled by Hon’ble Bombay High Court. It is a settled law that when there […]
Sunrise Containers Limited Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) There is no dispute that the legal case was filed by the Distiller’s Association of Maharashtra which consists of many member manufacturers. Therefore, the beneficiary of the outcome is not only the appellant but all the members which means that the service was availed by all […]
Monarch Research & Brokerage P Ltd Vs C.S.T.-Service Tax – Ahmedabad (CESTAT Ahmedabad) The issue involved in this case is whether NSE/BSE transaction charges and SEBI turnover fees paid by the stock brokers to the concerned agencies and recovered from their client is liable to service tax under the category of stock broker service. On […]
Bhavani Industries Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Issue lie in narrow compass that whether the appellant is eligible to Cenvat Credit in respect of Service Tax paid by Product Recall Insurance Policy. As per the facts of the case the Product Recall Insurance Policy is taken by the appellant, as per condition of sale […]
Hon’ble CESTAT Ahmedabad on the current issue observed that even though the reversal was not made under protest, the Appellant has the right to claim refund within one year as per Section 11B of Central Excise Act,1944 (CE Act). Noted, that the Appellant not filing the application under protest letter while reversing the credit refund cannot be rejected on this ground.
CESTAT, Ahmedabad held that the Product Recall Policy expenses is born for the purpose of security of the goods and for this reason the service falls under the definition of input services and is therefore, eligible for CENVAT Credit.
