CESTAT Delhi

No service tax on Independent Buildings having single Residential Unit

Prakash Wadhwani Vs Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Bhopal (CESTAT Delhi)

Service tax can be demanded under 65(105)(zzzh) only if the building concerned has more than 12 residential units in the building and such levy will not apply in cases where in one compound has many buildings, each having not more than 12 residential units....

Read More

No demand of service tax could be fastened on construction of complex

Prakash Builders Vs Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)

The definition of 'construction of complex' and a 'residential complex' continued to remain the same after 1 July, 2012 and, therefore, service tax liability could not have been fastened even after 1 July, 2012 under 'construction of complex'....

Read More

Area based exemption under central excise available where new unit successor to previous unit and to adjacent units.

Spring Dells Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)

Spring Dells Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) Conclusion: Assessee was entitled to the area-based exemption for the reason that it was admittedly the successor of the previous unit entitled to the exemption and all the units/sheds were located in one private industrial complex which could be said to be adj...

Read More

Necessity of investigation for system failure on mis-declaration of POS, MPOS devices and evasion of customs duty

Shri Chinta Haran Ojha Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)

Chief Commissioner of Customs was directed to consider whether it should be necessary to cause a vigilance enquiry on the system failure to determine how the consignments were cleared when there were so many mis-declaration in description as well as classification of the imported Point of Sale Devices (POS) and Mobile Point of Sale Device...

Read More

Co-noticees also liable for section 112B penalty with main noticee for custom duty evasion

A. V. Agro Products Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)

Since there was a clear nexus between the appellant -company and all the co-noticees for the alleged violation of the impugned notification which extended the concessional rate of customs duty of 20% ad valorem provided the imported CPO was meant for use in manufacture of soap, therefore, penalty was leviable under section 112B on the mai...

Read More

Penalty justified for evading customs duty by wrongly availing benefits

Bird Retail Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import) (CESTAT Delhi)

Adjudicating Authority was right in in imposing a penalty under the provision of Section 114A and Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 as  both the appellants were fully aware that M/s B Pvt. Ltd. was importing complete Segway electrically operated product in CKD condition by mis-declaring the same as CKD parts of components such as P...

Read More

Right to collect parking fees is nothing but a consideration liable to Service Tax

MGF Event Management Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi)

MGF Event Management Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi) We cannot accept the appellant‘s plea that huge parking space area was given to the appellant without any agreement with respect to financial consideration or without an agreement with respect to contingent liabilities with respect to theft, injuries, fire or other liabilities. It is difficult ...

Read More

If Designated Committee not issues SVLDRS 3 within 30 days it is a case of deemed discharge

Exotica Housing Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs, Goods and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)

Exotica Housing Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs, Goods and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) if Designated Committee has not issued SVLDRS 3 within 30 days it is a case of deemed discharge under SVLDRS- In that circumstances, SVLDRS-3 form has not been issued to the appellant, therefore, the designated authority was duty bound...

Read More

Quick Heal Antivirus Software was goods not liable to service tax: CESTAT

Quick Heal Technologies Limited Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)

Quick Heal Antivirus software was held to be 'goods‘, but whether the transaction would be sale or service, would depend upon the terms of the agreement. Thus, the transaction in the present Appeal resulted in the right to use the software and would amount to 'deemed sale‘ not liable to service tax...

Read More

Service cannot be termed as Franchise Service for mere user of word ‘Principle to Principle’ in agreement,

Easy Bill Ltd. Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi)

Easy Bill Ltd. Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi) Section 9.1 thought talks about the agreement to be on principle to principle basis as impressed upon by learned DR but perusal of this section reveals the subsequent portion explains that word principle to principle mean that the agreement is not intended to constitute a partnership, joint venture [&h...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,558)
Company Law (5,614)
Custom Duty (7,678)
DGFT (4,170)
Excise Duty (4,342)
Fema / RBI (4,064)
Finance (4,214)
Income Tax (32,433)
SEBI (3,369)
Service Tax (3,541)