Held that in case of Trademark License Agreement an exclusive license to use the trademark is granted and hence the same is covered within the phrase transfer of right to use the goods and hence not leviable to service tax.
Satya Power & Ispat Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The issue is whether the appellant is liable to pay central excise duty on removal of iron ore fines/iron ore concentrates? Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that in the de-novo proceedings, the lower authority without appreciating the submissions made […]
Where the Central Government formed a prima facie opinion that the final findings of the designated authority recommending imposition of anti-dumping duty were not required to be accepted then tentative reasons had to be recorded and conveyed to the domestic industry so as to give an opportunity to the domestic industry to submit a representation by following the principles of natural justice.
Held that colour data projectors are classified under CTI 8528 61 00 and accordingly unconditional exemption from payment of BCD available under serial no. 17 of exemption notification dated 01.03.2005.
Imported WAP was entitled to an exemption from the whole of the customs duties under the ITA as it worked on technology and did not support the LTE standard.
Held that service provider is entitled for refund under rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 when output service is exported. The said rule 5 doesn’t stipulate registration of premises as a necessary prerequisite for claiming a refund.
Sky Airways Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Customs Duty Paid Voluntarily During Investigation cannot be claimed as refund when CESTAT remanded the matter for a fresh adjudication The Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (CESTAT) in the matter of Sky Airways v. Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi [Final Order […]
Mehta Metal Industries Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Delhi) The issue involved in this appeal is whether the appellant assessee who is operating under ‘Compounded Levy Scheme’ is entitled pro-rata abatement/refund of duty for the period during which the machine admittedly was inoperative. CESTAT held that there is no dispute with regard […]
When there is no suppression of facts or mis-declaration, extended period is not invokable and the demand has to be held to be barred by time.
HLPL Global Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) A show cause notice dated 24.01.2020 was then issued to the appellant proposing to revoke the Customs Broker License of the appellant by considering the show cause notice dated 22.10.2019 issued under the provisions of the Customs Act as the offence report. The appellant […]
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
