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.
CESTAT Chandigarh sets aside penalty and interest imposed on Punj Brothers Limited for non-payment of customs duty on clearance of goods, citing limitation and lack of mutuality of interest between the parties. The case involved related party transactions and application of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000.
The CESTAT Chandigarh upheld the deletion of service tax on installation commissioning services on the ground of limitation. The case involved Himachal Futuristic Communication Limited.
