Sponsored
    Follow Us:

CESTAT Delhi

Refund of Service Tax wrongly paid only if no unjust enrichment proved by Appellant

April 1, 2021 858 Views 1 comment Print

Rakesh Canteen Contractor Vs Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs & ServiceTax (CESTAT Delhi) The brief facts are that the appellant has been awarded canteen services contract from M/s Caparo Engineering India Limited, by way of running and managing their canteen located in their factory premises. The only issue involved in this appeal is under the facts […]

Cenvat Credit admissible on input service used for creation of storage facilities for inputs outside the premises in relation to manufacture of goods

April 1, 2021 945 Views 0 comment Print

Balkrishna Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) Service in question i.e. renting of immovable property is very well covered in ‘means’ as well as ‘includes’ clause of the definition of the input service as given under Rule 2 (I) of Cenvat Credit Rule, 2004. This Rule allows Cenvat Credit of all such […]

Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules applicable only to Manufactured Goods

April 1, 2021 2376 Views 0 comment Print

Sundaram Packaging India Pvt.Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs, CGST & Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) Scope of Rule 6 is still with respect to the inputs/inputs services used in or in relation to the manufacture of exempted goods along with manufacture of non-exempted goods. Hence, irrespective, exempted goods include non-excisable goods in view of the amendment […]

No penalty on both organisation & office bearers for same omission

April 1, 2021 771 Views 0 comment Print

Sikar Ex-Serviceman Welfare Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs Commissioner Central Excise and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The final submission of appellant is that once the penalty has been imposed upon an organisation, simultaneous imposition of penalty on the office bearers thereof, is not sustainable. We observe in view of the definition of company in Section 3 […]

CENVAT credit allowable to telecom companies in respect of towers

March 31, 2021 1167 Views 0 comment Print

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited Vs Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit (CESTAT Delhi) It is a fact that out of the total amount of CENVAT credit of Rs. 4,99,32,736/- that has been disallowed claiming it to be for purchase of towers falling under Chapter 73. However, an amount of Rs. 4,90,91,607/- consisted […]

CHA’s licence can be suspended on the basis of voluntary confession

March 26, 2021 2256 Views 0 comment Print

D.S. Cargo Agency Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) No doubt, there is no document on record as provided by the Department, burden to prove otherwise rests upon the Department but it is settled principle of law that the appellants admission are the best proof which need no further proof. Hence, the burden need not […]

CESTAT remanded back order of revocation of CHA licence on issue of jurisdiction

March 24, 2021 705 Views 0 comment Print

Wijeta Impex And Logistics Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT DELHI ORDER The order of Commissioner (Appeals) bearing No. 191-193/2017 dated 24 May, 2019 has been assailed vide the impugned appeal. 2. I have heard Shri S. Sunil, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant and Shri Yasbir Singh, learned Authorised […]

CENVAT Credit on Inputs used in Fabrication of ‘Clean Room’ eligible to Pharma Companies

March 24, 2021 2109 Views 0 comment Print

Syncom Formulations (I) Ltd. Vs Commissioner (CESTAT Delhi) I find that admittedly, the appellant have used the disputed inputs for fabrication of clean room, which is essential for manufacture of their dutiable goods, as such clean room is  necessary for maintaining proper temperature and hygiene as well as keeping the RH factor in control, and […]

Clandestine removal based on mere third party documents is invalid

March 23, 2021 1908 Views 0 comment Print

Recon Steel & Power Private Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner, Central Tax, Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Since the sole challenge to the order is its reliance upon third party evidence, it is necessary to check the evidentiary value of the third party The relevant case law in the case of Bajrangbali Ingots & Steel […]

If a Rule is not attracted, than the proviso thereunder does not attracted

March 22, 2021 567 Views 0 comment Print

Vishnu Fragrance Pvt.Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Central Excise and Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Rule 10 of Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2010, provides for abatement in case of non production of goods (in case of factory did not produce the notified goods […]

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
February 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728