Jethanand Rohra Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Mumbai) CESTAT held that As the goods are lying under seizure and subsequent confiscation by the Customs Department for more than two years, for no fault of the appellant, grant of waiver of detention and demurrage charges is appropriate and direct that the proper certificate shall be issued […]
Raychem RPG Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) We are not in agreement with the findings recorded by the Commissioner on the issue of limitation. Undisputedly all the facts were in the knowledge of the revenue and in fact have been corresponded between the revenue and appellant since 1993. For the clearance of […]
Brose India Automotive Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) Denial to avail CENVAT credit on Service Tax paid during GST regime under Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) on import of services by the Appellant manufacturing company and its confirmation by the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I), Pune vide above referred […]
Karim Jaria Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import-I) (CESTAT Mumbai) CESTAT held that Reliance on statements alone is too fragile a foundation to build a case of undervaluation; such depositions are reliable only with corroborative support. In the absence of corroboration, test of cross-examination is of essence, as mandated by section 138B of Customs Act, 1962, for […]
Credit Suisse Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) Admittedly as has been held in the Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal in terms of Notification No. 12/2013-ST the last date for filing of such refund application is before 30.04.2018 or to say in specific terms on or before 29.04.2018, though the same is not […]
M/s Sim Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Customs (Export) (CESTAT Mumbai) Mismatch of description of goods in the import document and subsequent sale invoices that form the sole ground of rejection of refund claim of 4% SAD by the refund sanctioning authority that was confirmed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) is assailed in this appeal. […]
Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (CESTAT Mumbai) Department urged a new ground, which was not even part of the allegations contained in the show cause notice nor part of the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals), that the definition of input contains an exclusion clause which excludes from the ambit of inputs all goods […]
Arcil Catalyst Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import) (CESTAT Mumbai) Conclusion: Where the rendering of the contracted service was to be contingent on readiness of the facility and that the purchase order for the goods to be imported was issued much after those terms of the service agreement was finalized, the rendering of service […]
Neno Crystal Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import) (CESTAT Mumbai) It would not be inappropriate to mention here that the Appellant’s case is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Madras High Court in Commissioner of Customs (Sea), Chennai-I Vs. M.R. Associates cited supra wherein it was clearly held that enhancement of value based on voluntary statement […]
We find there are different judicial forums who has held that high consumption of electricity by itself not a ground to infer suppression of production. The onus is on the department to prove allegation of clandestine removal with positive and concrete evidence.
