CESTAT Mumbai dismisses a revenue appeal, confirming that VAT/sales tax subsidies under the Goa scheme are not to be included in the assessable value for central excise duty.
The CESTAT Mumbai has remanded a service tax dispute back to the original authority for a new adjudication. The case centers on whether tax liability is determined by the date a service is completed or the date payment is received.
CESTAT Mumbai ruled Lehman Brothers India not liable for service tax on winding-up services, setting aside refund rejection and allowing appeals.
The CESTAT Mumbai has set aside a customs duty demand against JSW Steel, ruling that a corrigendum issued over four years after the original notice was a time-barred fresh notice. The tribunal found the initial SCN was defective for lacking legal authority.
CESTAT Mumbai remands Titanium Ten appeal back to the customs authority citing conflicting test reports for imported cotton fabrics. A fresh assessment is mandated.
CESTAT Mumbai held that confiscation of shark fins without any evidence that there was an attempt to export the same is not justifiable. Accordingly, order confiscating goods set aside and appeal allowed.
Commissioner of Customs had confirmed the entire differential duty. Assessee submitted that the intended use of these products was explicitly outlined by the medical licenses that had been awarded to assessee under Medical Devices Rules, 2017.
CESTAT Mumbai held that unreported cenvat credit doesn’t lapse merely the same is not shown in ST-3 return. Thus, denomination as anything other than procedural lapse in not reporting the existence of such credit, the impugned order cannot survive.
CESTAT Mumbai held that demand of anti-dumping duty in terms of notification no. 15/2014-CUS(ABD) cannot be sustained since no evidences established that the goods were either manufactured or supplied from China or were routed through Taiwan after being supplied from China.
CESTAT Mumbai held that imposition of penalty under section 114AA of the Customs Act not justified in absence of any dummy export or any criminal intent involving evasion of duty. Accordingly, provisions are not applicable where export goods have actually been exported.
