Explore the Shanti Construction Co vs. C.C.E. & S.T.-Rajkot case with CESTAT Ahmedabad. Delve into the nuances of service tax, Cenvat credit, and retrospective exemptions.
Explore the CESTAT Ahmedabad case of Majhar Muzaffar Hussain Sayed vs. C.C.-Mundra. Delve into the nuances of penalties imposed, cross-examination demands, and the remand for a fresh decision.
Laesen & Toubro Limited Vs C.C.-Mundra (CESTAT Ahmedabad) In view of the settled law, irrespective 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. Therefore, we are not addressing the issue that whether the […]
Explore the CESTAT Ahmedabad ruling in Huhtamaki PPL Ltd vs C.C.E. & S.T. regarding Cenvat Credit on warehousing services. Know the legal insights and implications.
• In a partnership firm, partner‘s capital can be in the form of cash/asset. It can also be in the form of contribution of skill and labour alone without contribution in cash. The appellant is a partner performing some duties for which he has an expertise, skill in the marketing and distribution of the goods manufactured by partnership firm M/s Zydus Healthcare. And as a remuneration, the appellant have been received the amount which is nothing else but a special share in the profit.
Bundy India Limited Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CORONATION SPINNING INDIA (Supra) has held that interest of refund on penalty is not admissible under Section 11BB. As a result I do not find the appellants are entitled to any refund of interest on penalty amount under Section […]
Explore the Patel Labour Contractor vs C.S.T. Service Tax case (CESTAT Ahmedabad) where legal nuances and interpretations led to a time-barred service tax demand. Understand key arguments and precedents.
Explore the case of Solvay Specialities India Pvt Ltd vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Vadodara-II (CESTAT Ahmedabad). Detailed analysis of Cenvat Credit eligibility for Group Insurance Services, referencing legal precedents and judicial interpretations.
Technocraft Enterprise Vs C.C. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) We find that the essential dispute is if the product imported by the appellant falls under Chapter Heading 72249099 or Chapter Heading 73049000. The appellant is seeking classification of the product as semi-finished product of other alloy steel. it is seen that only product with solid section are classifiable […]
Inox India Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) As regard the limitation, I find that there is no dispute that the appellant is availing the Cenvat credit and declaring in their monthly returns. The issue involved is also of interpretation of Cenvat Credit Rules and on this issue there are number of cases […]
