Analysis of Hero Motocorp Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Excise case. CESTAT Chandigarh allows CENVAT credit on helmet locks supplied with motorcycles as accessories.
CESTAT Chandigarh rules weighment by Food Corporation of India (FCI) doesnot fall under Business Auxiliary Service nullifying service tax demand.
Read about ATA Freight Line vs Commissioner case. Analysis of CESTAT Chandigarh ruling on logistics services, service tax liability, and appeal outcome.
CESTAT Chandigarh held that imposition of penalty unjustified as tax paid along with interest before issuance of show cause notice.
Read the CESTAT Chandigarh order quashing the excise duty demand on bought-out items by Oil Lube Systems. The appeal is partly allowed due to lack of proof for inclusion.
CESTAT Chandigarh held that activity of transportation and disposal of ash cannot be classified under taxable category of ‘Cleaning Services’. Accordingly, demand of service tax unsustainable.
Examining Nandji Mishra Vs Commissioner of Central Excise case on service tax non-payment penalties and the need for evidence verification.
In the case of Raj Inter Decor Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, CESTAT Chandigarh ruled that service tax cannot be levied for a composite contract under the wrong head.
Tribunal grants relief to small cable TV operator for Service Tax non-payment. M/s SIFY already paid tax. Appellant’s compliance efforts noted. Penalties set aside.
Comfort Polymers Pvt. Ltd. wins the case against CCE- Jammu at CESTAT Chandigarh. CENVAT credit on destroyed goods is allowed as per Rule 3(5B) and 3(5C) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
