Compelling imperative consequent upon contradictory reports cannot be ignored. For central excise authorities to assume antipodal positions is neither becoming nor legally proper
CESTAT Mumbai remands Michigan Engineers Pvt Ltd’s case for re-adjudication, questioning service classification and subcontractor’s role in taxable services.
CESTAT Mumbai: Saf Yesat Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – penalties deemed jurisdictionally void for issuing second SCN without adjudicating first.
CESTAT Mumbai rules in favor of Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd., stating no confiscation if prior permission taken for storage of non-bonded goods in bonded warehouse. Detailed analysis of the case provided.
The CESTAT Mumbai allows the appeal in the case of Reliable Automotive Private Limited versus Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, setting aside demands and penalties. Get insights into the legal proceedings and conclusions.
Detailed analysis of CENVAT credit eligibility for electricity transferred to sister unit free of cost. Learn from the CESTAT Mumbai order on Finolex Industries Ltd vs. Commissioner.
CESTAT Mumbai’s order exempts Bigtree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. from service tax, citing no consideration from card companies for online ticketing platform under BookMyShow.
Read the full text of the CESTAT Mumbai order allowing refund of service tax paid on cancelled bookings of flats by Kanakia Spaces Reality Pvt. Ltd.
Learn about the customs duty dispute over MIKO II’s classification. Analysis reveals its advanced technology warrants ‘automatic data processing machine’ status.
Dive into the analysis of service tax exemption under section 65(105)(zzzza) for construction not primarily for commerce/industry, as seen in RBS Candiaparcar Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai).
