CESTAT Kolkata held that payment received towards Licensing Fee from mobile towers cannot be considered as ‘rent’ to fall within the definition of ‘renting of immovable property’. Accordingly, service tax demand to that extent set aside.
CESTAT Kolkata held that demand of service tax on account of non-payment of service tax under commercial training and coaching services on hostel fees received for non-residential courses, is not sustainable and hence we set aside the same. Accordingly, demand set aside and appeal allowed.
Kolkata CESTAT sets aside penalty on a diamond firm director, finding no evidence of involvement in alleged misdeclaration or overvaluation of imported goods.
CESTAT Kolkata held that club not being an advertising agency, service tax cannot be levied for advertisement published in souvenir or any display carried out in club premises. Accordingly, service tax demand set aside.
CESTAT Kolkata held that recovery of cenvat credit alleging receipt of only paper invoice without actual receipt of inputs is not tenable due to incomplete investigation carried out on the part of the department. Also held that recovery is not sustainable since vendor is not made co-noticee.
As discussed above amendment and assessment/re-assessment signify two clearly distinct connotations importing distinct and separate meanings and encompassing different areas of action. We are thus not able to appreciate any merit in the view as canvassed by the Ld. Counsel.
CESTAT Kolkata dismisses revenue appeals against Limak-Soma JV, ruling against retrospective application of customs notification amendments for duty recovery.
CESTAT Kolkata held that revenue has not brought any cogent evidence towards foreign origin (Chinese Origin) of goods (fire crackers). Further, investigation and proceedings are also conducted in casual manner. Thus, order is set aside.
CESTAT Kolkata held that Lemoneez, being juice of single citrus pulp, is rightly classifiable under Tariff Item No. i.e. CTH 2009 31 00 instead of CTH 2106 as alleged by department. Hence, differential duty demand is set aside.
CESTAT Kolkata held that the enhanced rate of duty in terms of Notification No. 87/2017-Cus. dated 17.11.2017 is not applicable here since notification was published in Official Gazette on 20.11.2017 and date of entry inwards are prior to 20.11.2017.
