Synergy Baxi Logistics Pvt Ltd. Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi) It is held that if the two services are billed separately then there is no question of including them together for computation of taxable value for payment of service tax. It can be seen from the above reproduced clarification given by the Board that in 2002 […]
Petronet LNG Limited Vs Principal Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The Appellant regasifies Liquefied Natural Gas owned by customers in terms of Agreements which also contain a clause relating to “allowed loss and consumption” under which a certain percentage of LNG made available to the Appellant by the customers is understood to be lost/consumed […]
Max Life Insurance Co. India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Central Excise and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT Delhi has held that service tax was not payable on surrender charges deducted from the fund value of policy holder on pre-mature withdrawal, as it was not for asset management but a penalty. The Tribunal, considering clarification by CBEC […]
CESTAT Delhi has held that mere cabling of various parts of agricultural machine (laser level transmitter, laser receivers, control boxes connecting cables and rechargeable battery packs) so as to let them function as a complete machine does not amount to manufacture and hence benefit of Sl. No. 399(A) of Not No. 12/2012-Cus. cannot be denied.
M/s Jubilant Life Science Limited Vs Additional Director General (Adj) (CESTAT Delhi) Following the decision of the High Court of Orissa in the case of Tata Steel v. Union of India & Ors. [W.P. (C) No. 7917 of 2009],wherein the Explanation to Rule 10(2) of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, […]
So far the demand for sale of domain name is concerned, the issue stands decided in favour of the appellant in the case of Tata Sons Limited (supra) wherein it has been held that transaction in domain name is a transaction in property in the goods and amounts to transaction of sale of goods. Domain name are akin to trade mark, making them the property of the person who owns it.
Jaiswal Import Cargo Services Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT New Delhi has observed that assorted birthday candles with Chlorate, Potassium, Aluminium, etc., (material for fireworks) only in material contents of the central wig, are not classifiable as fireworks. The Tribunal for this purpose, relied upon Rule 3(a) of Interpretative Rules and the […]
Delhi High Court has held that statement of directors of company who were co-noticees cannot be in every case need to be cross examined under Section 9D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or Section 138 of Customs Act, 1962. It was held that statement of directors cannot be called as statement simplicitor but a statement as that of the company.
Mikuni India Pvt. Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Goods and (CESTAT Delhi) It is not in dispute that the issue involved in this appeal is similar to the issues involved in the appeal that came up for decision before the Division Bench of the Tribunal in M/s India Yamaha Motor Private Limited. The Division Bench […]
India Yamaha Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) For the demand relating to the period from 1 April, 2012 to 1 July, 2012 i.e. pre negative list period: The definition of manpower recruitment and supply agency is relevant for the impugned adjudication. Section 65(68) of the Act defines manpower recruitment and supply […]
