Shri Surya Prakash Gaur Vs Commissioner, Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi)- Service of order by Speed Post cannot be deemed to be served in absence of proof of delivery – Section 37C of Central Excise Act-1944
CESTAT Delhi held that imposition of penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act without elements of fraud or collusion or willful mis-statement or suppression of facts or violation of Act or Rules made thereunder with an intent to evade payment of tax is untenable in law.
CESTAT Delhi held that mere acceptance of the reassessed value and payment thereof will not be sufficient to confirm the allegations of undervaluation. Burden on the department to prove mis-declaration and undervaluation not discharged. Hence, differential duty demand set aside.
CESTAT Delhi remanded the matter to designated authority in the matter of imposition of anti-dumping duty on imports of MEG ‘Mono Ethylene Glycol’ as selective examination with respect to only one period was made as base for determination of injury.
Read about CESTAT Delhi’s decision in the case of Incredible Indian Moments Pvt Ltd versus Commissioner (Appeals) and Additional Director General, where Service Tax demand on tour operators was quashed.
CESTAT Delhi sets aside service tax demand on Goods Transport Agency Service, citing lack of evidence to prove service provided to NTPC. Full case analysis here.
CESTAT Delhi held that initiation of proceedings against Customs Broker alleging violation of regulation 10(n) of the Customs Broker Licence Regulations, 2018 unjustified as he is not the party to alleged mis-declaration and undervaluation.
CESTAT Delhi held that service provided by technical, inspection and certification agency in relation to inspection and certification of export goods is liable to service tax under ‘Technical, Inspection and Certification Service’.
CESTAT Delhi held that once rule 10(b) of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1944 gets applicable, residual rule 11 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1944 cannot be applied. Hence, demand confirmed under rule 11 is liable to be set aside.
CESTAT Delhi held that absolute confiscation of the gold and imposition of penalty thereon justifiable on account of illicit smuggling of gold without any valid documents.
