Notification No. 52 ibid as amended by Notification Nos. 30 and 34 ibid clearly prescribe vide new Condition No.8 which is extracted elsewhere in this order that no duty shall be leviable if raw material is destroyed within the unit after intimation to the Customs authorities.
Service Tax demand was quashed as inclusion of turnover of Manufacturing unit for quantification of amount for reversal of CENVAT Credit was appropriate since for the entire remaining activities of the Puducherry manufacturing unit, the centralized service tax registration at Bangalore was applicable, which was as a SERVICE PROVIDER as well as an INPUT SERVICE DISTRIBUTOR.
CESTAT allowed the refund of 4% of Special Additional Duty. Further, held that if two reasonable constructions of a taxing provision are possible then that construction which favours the assessee must be adopted.
Suvikram Plastex Pvt Ltd Vs CCT (CESTAT Bengalore) Transition of unutilised Input Tax Credit could be allowed only in respect of taxes and duties which were subsumed in the new GST Law. Admittedly, the three types of Cess involved before us, namely Education Cess, Secondary and Higher Education (SHE) Cess and Krishi Kalyan Cess were […]
Traco Cable Company Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Respondent Central Excise (CESTAT Bangalore) The first question as to whether the supplementary invoices relate to the date of original clearance or the date on which the supplementary invoice was raised has been decided by the Supreme Court in Steel Authority of India. Accordingly, interest under Section 11AB […]
Sherly Sany Vs C.C, Cochin (CESTAT Bangalore) It is arbitrary not to give option to pay fine in lieu of confiscation to the person in possession of Gold While quashing an order of the customs authorities, CESTAT, Bangalore held that the order of confiscation without offering an option to pay fine to the person in […]
Nizar Moulavi Abdul Khader Vs Commissioner of Customs Mangalore (CESTAT Bangalore) Order-in-Original records a finding that gold was found in the foot band worn for medical purpose on both the feet of the appellant, well hidden/covered with black socks, shoes put over them. This is claimed as having been found on the ‘person of the […]
CESTAT held that when the customs duty is paid in excess, the department is liable to refund the same and the limitation provided under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 will not be applicable.
Explore the CESTAT Bangalore judgment in Apnacar.Com Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner, addressing refund claim on excess taxes paid, evidentiary requirements, and time limits.
IBM India Private Limited Vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Bangalore-ltu (CESTAT Bangalore) Admittedly the appellants are providing the services to their foreign company situated outside India and their parent company does not have any commercial or industrial establishment or any office in India and the services by appellant are provided in relation to provision of service recipient […]
