CESTAT Chennai

Customs duty already discharged cannot be re-collected from new purchaser

Chloride Metals Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)

imported goods and therefore could not collect further amount against the amended bills of entry presented by the new purchaser cannot be a ground to issue a Show Cause Notice alleging attempt to claim an undue refund....

Read More

Revocation of customs broker’s license on non-production of KYC documents of exporter is valid

Prabhu Shipping Systems Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)

The appellant or its employee has not conducted any due diligence measures. They claimed to have obtained KYC documents through email but have failed to produce them either before the Inquiry officer or at any stage. The irresistible conclusion can only be that they have no such documents and also no idea of who the exporter was and simpl...

Read More

No Service tax on goods component of composite works contract if VAT been paid

Touchstone Infrastructure and Solutions Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Taxes and Central Excise (CESTAT Chenaai)

Where VAT had been paid on the goods component of the composite works contract, no service tax could be levied on such component again taking recourse to Rule 2A(ii) of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006....

Read More

Section 114AA Penalty not leviable in absence of misdeclaration or misstatement

Chloride Metals Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)

As per section 114AA, penalty can be levied only when a person knowingly or intentionally makes, signs or uses or causes to be made, signed or used, any declaration, statement or document, which is false or incorrect....

Read More

GST: Transitional credit of tax paid under erstwhile law is available under section 142(3)

Terex India Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of GST (CESTAT Chennai)

Section 142 (3) is the transitional provision for claim of refund after the introduction of GST Act, 2017. It says that refund claims of any amount paid under the erstwhile law have to be disposed according to the provisions of the erstwhile law and the amount has to be paid in cash. The appellants have paid the tax under the erstwhile la...

Read More

ITC of inputs, capital goods & services used in fabrication, erection, installation of towers & shelter is admissible

Vodafone Cellular Limited Vs Commissioner of GST &

Brief issue involved in the matter is that whether the credit on inputs and capital goods / services used in fabrication, erection, installation of towers and shelters is admissible or not. Further, issue also involves that whether extended period can be invoked in the present matter....

Read More

No amortization on additional supplies when cost fully amortized on initial supply

Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST &

The appellant received patterns from their customers to whom they supply the casting manufactured using the patterns. In one of the order the total cost of pattern was amortized and accordingly the appellant did not took into consideration the value of pattern while clearing the additional order....

Read More

Sales promotion being essential character of bundle of services classifiable under ‘BAS’

Komatsu India (P) Limited Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)

CESTAT held that sales promotion and marketing being essential character of the bundle of services have to be classified under ‘Business Auxiliary Service’.  ...

Read More

Custom Authority cannot insist for producing entire original VAT/ST challans if no deficiency memo

Aditya Chemicals Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)

Aditya Chemicals Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) Production of original VAT or Sales Tax Challans not required for grant of SAD refund unless any deficiency memo is issued The Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (the CESTAT Chennai) in the case of M/s Aditya Chemicals v. Commissioner of Cust...

Read More

Service Tax refund: Certificate of existing Statutory Auditor cannot be denied for earlier period  

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Chennai)

Cognizant Technology Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Chennai) Service Tax refund: Certificate of existing Statutory Auditor cannot be denied for earlier period The second issue is that the auditor’s certificate is not signed by the statutory auditor who was engaged during the period ...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,807)
Company Law (7,811)
Custom Duty (8,842)
DGFT (4,671)
Excise Duty (4,562)
Fema / RBI (4,901)
Finance (5,283)
Income Tax (38,962)
SEBI (4,219)
Service Tax (3,821)

Search Posts by Date

December 2021
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031