The appellant falls into the criteria of an eligible passenger. He is thus allowed to import gold jewellery upto 10 kilograms by paying appropriate customs duty. The currencies seized from him are sufficient to pay the customs duty for the gold carried by him.
Doosan Bobcat India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) The issue is whether the amount of Rs.28.14 lakhs in the nature of payment of royalty can be included in the transaction value and whether it is a condition of sale. From the facts narrated above, it is seen that there is no agreement […]
Asveen Air Travels (P) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) The issue that arises for consideration is whether the incentive received by the appellant for using the CRS Developer is subject to service tax or not. The Larger Bench in the case of Kafila Hospitality and Travels Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has […]
Freight Link Logistics Vs The Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) In the present case, it is not disputed that M/s. Vaaraahi Traders are licensed to import goods and that their IE Code is valid. The case set up by the department is that the goods imported are for the use / purchase of Shri A. […]
TIDC India Ltd. Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) To claim Cenvat Credit primarily the service should be first covered under the definition of ‘input service’ and once the service is not covered due to exclusion clause irrespective of the fact whether the cost of service has been taken as expenditure in […]
HID India Private Limited Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) In this case refund of the unutilized cenvat credit was rejected holding that; firstly, the input services were received prior to obtaining the service tax registration from the Department; secondly, the invoices show the address of their Head office at Bangalore and […]
Ingram Micro India Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (Exports)(CESTAT Chennai) It can be seen that the refund claim is rejected on the ground that the appellant has not produced the Chartered Accountant certificate to establish that the burden of 4% Additional Duty has not been passed on to another. In page 21 of the appeal […]
MTL Instruments Private Limited Vs Commissioner of G.S.T. and Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai) The definition of input service was amended with effect from 01.04.2011 which has been reproduced in paragraph 5.1 above. The definition contains an exclusion clause wherein the credit availed on Rent-a-Cab Services as well as Outdoor Catering Services has been specifically excluded. […]
Hera Shipping Solutions Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) In order to attract section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, the department has to establish some act or omission by which the appellant has abetted the offence. Brief facts are that the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Chennai Zonal Unit gathered specific intelligence that […]
R.S. Arunachalam Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai) These appeals are filed against the orders passed by Commissioner (Appeals) who set aside the order passed by original authority and remanded the matter to reconsider the non-imposition of penalty on the appellants under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. M/s.R.S. Arunachalam is the Customs Broker […]
