CESTAT Kolkata held that there was no proposal to demand service tax under ‘Cargo Handling Service’ in the Notice, however, in the impugned order the adjudicating authority classified the services under ‘Cargo Handling Service’. Hence, adjudicating authority has travelled beyond the scope of the Notice, which is legally not sustainable.
CESTAT Kolkata judgment, where Micky Metals Limited successfully challenged a claim of clandestine removal based solely on discrepancies in audit report and ER-1 return figures. Understand the implications and insights from the case ruling.
Understand the pivotal judgment of CESTAT in the case between National Power Engineering Company and the Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, where no penalty was imposed after entire service tax and interest were paid before the issuance of the Show Cause Notice.
CESTAT held that post facto production of certificate entitled appellant to benefits of Exemption Notification No.108/95-CE. CESTAT Cited Supreme Court decision in case of Tullow India Operations Ltd.
In a dispute involving Jagat Janani Services and the Commissioner of Central Excise, CESTAT Kolkata has ordered re-adjudication after the original adjudicating authority rejected a reconciliation statement without adequate reasoning.
The CESTAT Kolkata has ruled in favor of Haldia Petrochemicals Limited in Excise Appeal No. 762/2010. The appeal challenged the duty demand of Rs. 10,67,40,103/- under the proviso to Section 11A, along with interest and penalty.
CESTAT Kolkata has quashed the service tax demand imposed on Walchandnagar Industries Limited (WIL) in a case involving a composite contract for setting up a cement manufacturing unit. The tribunal determined that the contract primarily involved the supply of goods, and the value assigned to the bought-out items sold by WIL cannot be considered as a consulting engineer service.
CESTAT Kolkata held that the shortage ascertained during the course of stock-taking are on the basis of assumption and presumption. Accordingly, duty demand on account of shortage of finished goods unsustainable.
CESTAT Kolkata held that duty demand on supply of transmission line accessories and hardware fittings unsustainable as the same is only supply and not manufacture. Further, revenue couldn’t adduce any evidence of clandestine manufacture.
CESTAT Kolkata held that rejection of refund claim of sugar cess on the ground of pendency of proceedings when no stay has been given by any higher court is unjustified.
