Glider Technologies Vs Commissioner of Customs Cochin-Cus (CESTAT Bangalore) Heard both sides. 2. Learned advocate submits that they have filed necessary application under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy dispute) Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS) before the concerned authority and since the appeal before this Tribunal was dismissed for non-payment of pre-deposit amount under Section 35F of Central Excise […]
Once there is no averment either in SCN or impugned orders regarding availment of benefits by suppression of fact or fraud, invoking extended period of limitation is not proper
During investigation there is no discrepancy pointed out regarding the stock of raw material maintained by the appellant and the return submitted for the relevant period shows proper transaction of said material as claimed by the appellant. After considering the above facts and circumstances, I find no reason to allege that the appellant had availed ineligible CENVAT credit.
Triumph India Software Services Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore) Managing Director of the appellant-company, appeared in person and submitted that she was the Managing Director of the Company at the relevant time. Due to financial difficulties, they could not pay service tax as submitted during investigation. Regarding the appellant’s responsibility to […]
CESTAT Bangalore held that as service actually falls under works contract service, then mere registration under construction of a new residential complex and payment of service tax thereon, wouldnt hold that services was rendered under construction of a new residential complex.
CESTAT Bangalore held that process undertaken by job worker of injecting the raw materials into aerosol cans doesn’t amount to manufacture and hence excise duty demand thereon not sustainable.
CESTAT Bangalore held that penalty under section 112 of the Customs Act against steamer agent unsustainable as confiscation of the said vessel for alleged violations of chapter VI of Customs Act, 1962 as well as the duty liability arising from misuse of ‘ship stores’ and ‘bunkers’ set aside.
CESTAT Bangalore held that notification no. 29/2018-CUS dated 01.03.2018 was published in the official gazette only on 06.03.2018 after it was digitally signed. Hence, the said notification is effect only from 06.03.2018 and not from 01.03.2018.
Ultimate use of imported goods cannot be criteria for valuation. Every business man is free to adopt his own way of conducting business
CESTAT Held that services of sales commission service don’t qualify as input service and accordingly Cenvat Credit on the same not available.
