Cipy Polyurethanes Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) The decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of BPL Display Devices Ltd [2004 (174) ELT 5 (SC)] clearly lays down that once the goods are procured for an intended use, then the benefit available and availed by them should not be denied […]
Kankariya Automobiles (P) Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Mumbai) From the records and narration of Learned Authorised Representative, it would appear that the appellant, an authorized dealer and service centre for motor vehicles, had provided space for insurance companies to solicit customers of insurance contracts on the vehicles sold by them. […]
Explore the Y & Associates vs. Commissioner of Central Excise case with CESTAT Mumbai. Delve into the intricacies of ‘deemed’ manufacture, excisability, and the legislative intent.
Imported External/portable hard disk drive are classifiable under Tariff Item 8471 70 20 as Hard disk drives and not under Tariff Item 8471 70 30. Therefore we are of the considered opinion that the instant issue about classification of External/Portable Hard Disc Drives is no more res integra and the appellants have rightly classified them under CTH 8471 7020.
Gammon India Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Mumbai) Mobilization advance is not an advance towards the provision of service and in the nature of loan facility. The ‘mobilization advance’ is adjusted against the final payment due and is not linked to the work but as a pledge of the contract between the appellant […]
The issue under consideration is whether denial of CENVAT credit availed by the appellant for construction/setting up of landfill is justified in law?
Classic Marble Company Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Mumbai) In this case The learned adjudicating authority has rejected the declared value in respect of the subject Bills of Entry under Section 14(1) ibid read with Rule 12 ibid and re-determined the assessable value under Section 14(1) ibid read with Rule 3(1) ibid, holding that sufficient […]
The issue under consideration is whether the service tax is applicable to the collection of Octroi for entry of goods in the discharge of sovereign privilege?
Gammon India Ltd Vs CST (CESTAT Mumbai) The Mumbai CESTAT, in Gammon India Ltd Vs. CST held that demand on Mobilization advance is not consistent with law and deserves to be set aside. Proviso to Section 2(31) of the CGST Act 2017 provides that deposits shall not be considered as payment made unless the supplier applies […]
The issue under consideration is whether the commission or agency fee remitted to entities for handling vessels outside India are exempt from service tax as per Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994?
