Matter for denying the lower rate of duty prescribed for heading no. 3105 corresponding to ‘other fertilisers’ in Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 was remanded back to the original authority for subjecting the statement of the employee, considered to be of particular relevance in determining the outcome of the impugned order, to the prescriptive mandate of section 9D of Central Excise Act, 1944.
Consideration as defined under Indian contract Act is different from Finance Act. Consideration has to be for provision of service and not forfeiture.
Innovative and Technological Learning Services Pvt Ltd. Vs Commissioner of CGST (CESTAT Mumbai) Demand based on audit without any further investigation is liable to be set aside on this count alone The appellant is a service provider. It provides services to a educational trust. It paid service tax. It suffered huge losses. As result of […]
CESTAT held that once the buyer of a flat cancelled the booking and the consideration for service was returned, the service contract got terminated and once it is established the no service is provided, then refund of tax for such service becomes admissible.
CESTAT Mumbai held that confirmation of differential duty necessarily has interest liability appended to it Accordingly liability to pay interest on duties short-paid at the time of clearance of goods for captive consumption does not get erased.
Cinepolis India Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of CGST (CESTAT Mumbai) These appeals of M/s Cinepolis India Pvt Ltd, against order-in-original no. MUM/CGST/MW/COMMR/AK/42-43/2020-21 dated 26th February 2021 of Commissioner of CGST, Mumbai West, arise from the unique deployment of constituents, that make up channel entities involved in exhibition of cinematographic films, in an arrangement by which […]
Reliance Mediaworks Ltd Vs Commissioner of GST (CESTAT Mumbai) The arrangement most commonly entered into between a theater owner and a distributor is that the theater owner screens the movie for fixed number of days under a contract. The proceeds earned through sale of tickets go to the distributor but the theatre owner receives a […]
CESTAT Mumbai held that imposing late fee charges on filing of new Bill of Entry, as old Bill of Entry got purged and erased in ICEGATE, is unsustainable in law.
Refund under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules also being a refund under section 11B would squarely fall within the ambit of Section 11BB and interest is payable in case of delay in sanctioning the refund under Rule 5
Reliance Industries Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Mumbai) CESTAT Mumbai held that insurance premium paid for group insurance to cover employees opting for Voluntary Separation Scheme (VSS) amounts to input service and accordingly cenvat credit available under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Facts- The appellant, M/s Reliance Industries Ltd, manufacturer of […]
