CESTAT Kolkata: Shri Vijay Kumar versus Commissioner of Central Excise – penalties under Customs Act section 112 deleted as no knowledge of gold concealed in bags.
Service tax demand on services from abroad before 18.4.2006 isn’t sustainable. Issuing authority must specify applicable sub-clause in notice.
Dive into the CESTAT Kolkata ruling on CENVAT credit dispute between Commissioner of Central Excise and Viraj Steel regarding steel items usage.
CESTAT Kolkata allows benefit of Notification No.25/1999-Cus as amended by Notification No.26/2002-Cus, which exempts Basic Customs Duty on imported Zinc Oxide which has been used in manufacture of PCFP.
Dive into the case of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Kolkata) regarding service tax demands. Detailed analysis and conclusion provided.
CESTAT Kolkata sets aside orders and allows appeals in Nalco Water India Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & Excise, Howrah case, holding distribution of input service credit on a pro rata basis valid.
CESTAT directed the customs department to deliver a certified copy of their final order to Vedanta Limited following proper procedures. This ensures Vedanta receives the order and can exercise their appeal rights.
CESTAT Kolkata rules no penalty on Rakesh Aggarwal without evidence of involvement in invalid BMW M5 importation. Detailed analysis and verdict explained.
CESTAT Kolkata rules in favor of UCO Bank, allowing Cenvat credit for service tax paid on telephone bills for employee residences. Details of the case here.
Rishu Enterprise vs. CGST & Excise: CESTAT Kolkata rules service tax demand unjustified solely on Form 26AS. Detailed analysis of the case provided.
