Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Baran Vs Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise Division (CESTAT Delhi) There is no dispute that the relevant date in the present case is 25.11.2012. Prior to this date on 28.05.2012, section 73(1) of the Finance Act was amended and it was provided that the Central Excise Officer could issue a notice […]
GEMSCAB Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner Central Goods (CESTAT Delhi) In view of the observed admission and settled law, the question of adjudication is answered in negative holding that CENVAT Credit cannot be denied on the ground that the supplier was not liable to pay the duty on the goods supplied. Also it is observed that […]
The Appellants contended that the mixture manufactured by the Respondents is Natural Gas Liquid (NGL) in contrast to which the Respondents submitted that the above is rather gas condensate on which NCCD should not be levied.
SRL Advisors LLP Vs Commissioner of Central Tax Delhi (CESTAT Delhi) Rule 2(bc) of Service Tax Rules, refers to the meaning of ‘body corporate’ in Section 2(7) of the Companies Act, wherein any other body corporate which includes a LLP is specifically excluded from the definition of body corporate. Thus I hold that the appellant […]
Hon’ble CESTAT, Delhi observed that Carting Challan is not equivalent to a Consignment note. Carting Challan is only for internal control of forest department whereas a Consignment Note is a negotiable instrument in which the transporter is bound to deliver the goods to a bonafide holder of title.
Appellant is entitled to refund of the amount of Cenvat Credit lying in their Cenvat Credit account on closure of business along with interest.
Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The issue involved in this appeal by the assessee is whether the demand of cenvat credit by way of reversal is justified, under the provisions of Rule 3(5B) of Cenvat Credit Rules, under the fact that the appellant has made provision in […]
Smt. Sushma Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Conclusion: Penalty against a Late Customs Inspector for the charges for abetment for fraudulent export of goods was deleted as there was no evidence produced by the department which might prove that assessee ever instigated or conspired or intentionally aided Shri Sajjan Kumar to fraudulently export the hand […]
Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Amount received by the appellant in terms of Machine Availability clause, from the service provider with reference to maintenance of WTG due to shortcoming in said service is merely an amount to safeguard the loss of appellant. The said amount cannot be called as consideration […]
Service tax under the category of OIDAR, therefore, cannot be levied upon a user merely because he receives a code for getting a printout of the ticket from the cinema hall.
