CESTAT Hyderabad held that freight charges for delivering goods to the buyers premises is not includible while assessing the value for the purpose of payment of central excise duty.
CESTAT held that exemption under Notification No.12/2012-CE is available to sub-contractor who supplied the goods to the main contractor who has been awarded contract/ work order under ICB.
IND Synergy Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Hyderabad) This appeal has been filed by M/s IND Synergy Ltd., (Raipur) assailing the order-in-original dated 31.07.2020 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs Visakhapatnam, the operative part of which is as follows: (a) “I deny the benefit of Notification No. 097/2004-Customs dated 17.09.2004 to the capital […]
CESTAT Hyderabad held that classifying micronutrients manufactured by the appellant, as plant growth regulators, under Chapter heading 38089304 instead of Chapter heading 3105 is unsustainable
OSI Systems Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Hyderabad) The brief facts are that the appellant was an assessee under the service tax regime and they migrated to GST regime and they also filed TRAN-1 for taking forward the credit which was lying in their Cenvat credit register. Subsequently, it was pointed out […]
CESTAT Hyderabad held that CENVAT Credit of service tax paid on premium for medical insurance of employees and their families is eligible.
There would be difference if a person was engaged in proving any service connected with the making or preparation of the advertisement and a case where a person merely complied with the instruction of the clients for printing the contents supplied by the client thus, the activity of printing of advertisement content on PVC materials amounted to “manufacture”, and therefore, service tax was not leviable.
CESTAT Hyderabad held that confiscation of already exported goods not possible under section 113 of the Customs Act because once the goods are exported, Indian Customs has no control over the goods and therefore, they cannot be confiscated.
ITAT Hyderabad held that Cenvat credit of inputs used in manufacture of goods exported under bond from a Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) to a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) unit is available as refund under rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
CESTAT Hyderabad held that extended period of limitation can be invoked only when there is willful suppression of facts with an intention to evade payment of service tax.
