The goods imported by assessee, such as, Big Cola, Big Orange Cola, Big Lemon etc., which they described as ‘carbonated beverage with fruit juice’ were neither carbonated beverage alone nor fruit juice alone gave the essential character of the products in question; both contribute to its essential character. The issue could not be resolved as per Rule 3(a) and 3(b) of the Rules of Interpretation and therefore resort was to be made to Rule 3(c). Since Customs tariff heading (CTH) 22029920 came last in the order, it prevails and the goods were classifiable under this heading.
M/s. Tinplate Company of India Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Kolkata) Conclusion: Assessee adid not receive any amount from TSL as and by way of consignment agent or towards providing any consignment agency service under the consignment agency agreement and also, assessee had cleared the converted goods on payment of […]
BST Infratech Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & Excise, Bolpur Commissionerate (CESTAT Kolkata) We find that no physical verification of input consumption qua finished goods manufactured thereto was carried out by the department. The duty has been demanded on the basis of audit objection without causing any investigation. It is our considered view that the […]
Sourav Ganguly Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Kolkata) It transpires from the records that after the passing of the order dated November 12, 2012 by the Commissioner, the appellant deposited the confirmed demand of Rs. 1,51,66,500/- on February 26, 2014 and subsequently also deposited an amount of Rs. 50 lacs on March 21/26, 2014 […]
Bengal Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs CGST & Excise, Howrah (CESTAT Kolkata) In the instant case, the only dispute herein is for payment of remuneration in the nature and form of commission based on percentage of profit to whole time directors, which is a fact on record. Section 2(94) of Companies Act, 2013, duly defines ‘whole-time […]
ST – Where Cenvat credit wrongly taken is subsequently reversed, it is tantamount to non-availment of credit – Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules (CCR)is inapplicable in such circumstances: CESTAT Kolkata
Dewanchand Ramsaran Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Kolkata) We find that the learned Commissioner, in page No. 7 & 8 of the impugned order, after having noted that aforesaid scope of work, has hurriedly concluded that the work is nothing but maintenance and repair of workover oil wells. […]
Commr. of Central Excise Vs Anmol Biscuits Ltd. (CESTAT Kolkata) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CCEx.,Belgaum Vs. Vasavadatta Cements Ltd. : 2018 (11) GSTL 3 (SC) held that that the assessee is legally eligible to avail credit on outward transportation availed from place of removal upto a certain point, whether it is a […]
The issue under consideration is whether the lower authority is correct in stating that the appellant is not entitled to avail credit of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of exempted goods since they have cleared the said exempted goods for export outside India?
Mahanadi Coalfields Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & CX (CESTAT Kolkata) The only issue involved in this appeal is whether the appellant is liable to deposit service tax under Security Service under reverse charge when the entire service tax amount has been reimbursed to the service provider who has deposited the same with the Govt. […]
