CESTAT Allahabad rules that screening films in multiplexes is not a Business Support Service, quashing service tax demand on PVS Multiplex India Pvt. Ltd.
In Kancor Ingredients Ltd vs Commissioner (CESTAT Allahabad), the court rules that accumulated Cenvat Credit refund is valid for goods exported without a bond.
CESTAT Allahabad quashes service tax demand on Indus Valley Partners, ruling classification based on non-existing provision is bad in law.
CESTAT Allahabad rules on LG Electronics India vs Commissioner of Central Excise, emphasizing procedural violations are not suppression for extended limitation.
CESTAT held that Department could not solely rely on audit queries and objections to invoke extended period of limitation. It reiterated that appellant, being a Private Limited Company, had its Profit/Loss Account and Balance Sheet accessible as public documents, thus undermining any allegation of suppression.
Read the detailed analysis of the CESTAT Allahabad order directing the Commissioner of Customs to return seized gold, ruling it wasn’t smuggled. Learn about the case of Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) vs. Sai Max Jewelers.
It is settled law that appellant refund claim wherein order determining duty is not challenged and modified in appeal by appellate authority, refund claim is not maintainable.
CESTAT Allahabad held that value of clearance of dummy unit created for evading payment of duty by availing benefit of exemption provided under exemption notification no 8/2003-CE unsustainable. Accordingly, value of all such units clubbed together for evaluating availability of exemption under notification no. 8/2003-CE.
CESTAT Allahabad dismisses appeal for violation of Rule 20 due to repeated adjournments. Detailed analysis of the impact of adjournment culture on justice delivery.
CESTAT Allahabad rules that payment of VAT/Sales Tax on deemed sales does not automatically exclude the transaction from service tax liability.
