CESTAT held that transport charges cannot be included in valuation for mining services when transport activities been performed in mining area
Held that power tillers and rotary tillers are self same goods. Accordingly benefit of concessional rate of basic customs duty of 2.5% under notification no. 12/2012- Customs dated 17.03.2012 is available on import of power tillers
Held that the Service tax is paid on the basis of the revenue realized towards the provision of the taxable services and not on the basis of the revenue recognition.
CESTAT Kolkata held that bona fide belief that goods manufactured and cleared were not subject to excise duty needs to be established. Duty demand is sustainable in case the bona fide belief is not established.
Since the whole case of Revenue was based on the balance sheets of assessee who had declared all the transactions in their records and had even paid capital gains tax on the profit/compensation received, therefore, it could not be said that assessee had resorted to wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts or had contravened of any of the provisions of service tax law with intent to evade payment of service tax.
Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Vs Hi-Tech Bottling Private Limited (CESTAT Kolkata) Held that the process of manufacture consisting of blending, bottling, and packaging of Indian-made foreign liquor is covered within the definition of manufacture and hence excluded from the purview of Business Auxiliary Service Facts- The assessee is engaged in carrying out […]
Not following order of HC or SC would amount to mistake/error which is rectifiable under provisions of Section 154 of Customs Act, 1962
Where there were divergent views on the issue and even if it is ultimately settled against the assessee, extended period cannot be invoked.
Held that refractory bricks required for re-lining of the furnace are covered within the definition of capital goods and hence eligible for EPCG scheme as per notification no. 102/2009- Cus dated 11.09.2009
Held that allegation of clandestine removal only on the basis of incriminating statements, which were retracted, in absence of corroborative evidence is unsustainable.
