Explore CESTAT Ahmedabad decision in Anil Dudalal Kaneria vs C.C.E. Understand the penalty reduction from INR 5 Lacs to INR 1 Lac for failure in goods accounting. Details and implications.
we find that Learned Commissioner (Appeals) denied the refund claims solely on limitation. There is no dispute of the fact that the goods have been exported by the appellant during the period April 2008 to March 2009 by utilizing the services on which service tax was payable for the exported goods.
Explore the CESTAT Ahmedabad case – Anjaleem Enterprise P Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T. Learn how lower authorities violated Tribunal orders on duty, depreciation, and payment.
Held that a person carrying on a business through a branch or agency in any country shall be treated as having a business establishment in that country and such establishment situated abroad as a separate person.
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Introduction The case of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. C.C.E. & S.T. revolves around the interpretation and applicability of Notification No. 29/89-C.E. dated 01.03.1989. This article delves into the details of the notification, the conditions for its benefit, and the subsequent legal proceedings. Detailed Analysis […]
Explore the CESTAT Ahmedabad ruling in Bhilosa Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. C.C.E. & S.T. case, clarifying interest on delayed refund under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
Explore the CESTAT Ahmedabad ruling on Steel & Metals Co. penalty for CENVAT invoicing violations. Understand the case, analysis, and the implications of Rule 26.
Explore the CESTAT Ahmedabad decision in Atul Parekh vs. C.C.E. & S.T. case. Penalties under Rule 26 for abetment in fraudulent Cenvat Credit nullified. Case details and analysis.
Explore the case of Tega Industries vs. C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) as CESTAT overturns refund denial. Analysis of Business Support Service, procedural lapses, and distinct identities.
CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled in favor of DKNV Engineering Pvt Ltd, stating that credit denial based on photocopies of invoices is a procedural lapse, not a valid reason.
