CESTAT Chennai reduces penalties imposed on Artisan’s Welfare Society for attempting to export red sander wood in the form of pillar tops in violation of Customs Act and Foreign Trade Act.
CESTAT set aside the order demanding service tax on rental property and held that, income received from rent by assessee is not subject to levy of service tax.
CESTAT Chennai held that the appellant was eligible to clear rough castings to their sister concern on payment of duty on the assessable value based on comparable prices of goods cleared by them to non-related buyers. Provisions of rule 8 of CVR 2000 applicable only w.e.f. 01.12.2003 after amendment by notification no. 14/2012-CE (NT) dated 22.12.2003.
CESTAT Chennai has ruled in favor of SDS Ramcides Crop Science Pvt. Ltd., allowing them to re-export the imported insecticides without payment of redemption fine and penalties.
CESTAT Chennai has ruled that ‘Natural Rock Phosphate’ imported goods are not considered as ‘fertilizers’ under the FCO, making them ineligible to claim exemption of SAD under the specified notification.
CESTAT Chennai held that transaction value declared by the importer duly accepted as earlier imports cleared accepting the declared value and also value of the contemporaneous import of identical goods has not been conclusively arrived at by the lower adjudicating authority.
CESTAT Chennai dismissed the revenue appeal for lack of concrete grounds of appeal, with the arguments being merely surmises and generic.
CESTAT Chennai held that boiler in unassembled form is removed in several lots on different dates doesn’t mean that parts only and not the whole boiler is cleared from factory. The parts are to be classified as complete machine under 8402.10. Hence, exemption vide Sl.No.84 of Notification No.6/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006 as amended duly available.
CESTAT Chennai allowed the assessee’s appeal, stating that the demand of duty with interest was time-barred and could not be sustained. The Tribunal held that the SCN issued after the appeal stage lacked validity and that the demand of duty and interest was not justified. The department’s appeal was dismissed.
CESTAT Chennai acknowledged the procedural violation by the appellant but recognized that the goods underwent 100% examination, revealing no banned substances. Considering this and the appellant’s cost and delay in the clearance process, the CESTAT Chennai found the imposed redemption fine and penalties excessive. Therefore, the CESTAT Chennai reduced the redemption fine to INR 1,00,000 and the penalty to INR 50,000.
