Muktabai Govind Pawar Vs Commissioner of Custom (CESTAT Mumbai) The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) Mumbai bench has held that the Commissioner (Appeals), has no power to condone delay beyond three months under the Finance Act, 1994. The assessee was aggrieved with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) who dismissed […]
Arguably, service tax payment is necessary when the four things are satisfied;(i) There is a service(ii) There is a service provider(iii) There is a service recipient(iv) There is a consideration for such service paid by the recipient of service to the provider of the service.
Casa Grande Co-Operative Housing Vs Commissioner of CGST (CESTAT Mumbai) When any provision in the statute has been held to be unconstitutional, refund of tax under such statute will be outside the scope and purview of such enactment and under such circumstances, refund can be claimed by way of a suit or by way of a […]
CESTAT held that service rendered by ‘lead generator’ is not that of an ‘insurance agent’ and, consequently, the commission paid by respondent to such entities are not liable to be included in the assessable value of the respondent for discharge of tax liability under Finance Act, 1994.
The assessee should have been put to Notice and a reasonable opportunity should have been given for representing their case. While the same was not done, jumping straight way to coercive measures was certainly uncalled for. Therefore, Interest collected being without authority of Law needs to be refunded along with applicable interest.
CESTAT Mumbai has held that Cenvat credit can be availed on foreign warehouse services received by a company in India for which service tax was paid under reverse charge mechanism. It was held that denial of credit would amount to double taxation.
Kopran Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (E) (CESTAT Mumbai) Rejecting the plea that bond/LUT executed by assessee-importer did not cover the anti-dumping duty leviable on material imported under Advance Authorisation, The Tribunal observed that the bond executed did not make any distinction between the duties leviable. Larger Bench order in Caprihans and Bombay High Court […]
CESTAT Mumbai has allowed benefit of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. (Sl. No. 230) to hydraulically operated self-propelled piling rig for construction of road in a case where it was alleged that the goods were involved in activities other than those specified.
BCCI Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Mumbai) it is undisputedly admitted that appellants have provided the program feed to the M/s MSM Singapore at the venue of match which is in India and not outside. The programme feed as provided by the appellant, is encrypted and then uplinked by the said M/s MSM/ WSG […]
Medisray Laboratories P. Ltd. Vs CCGST (CESTAT Mumbai) Coming to the statutory audit procedure, the purpose of audit, as available in the Manual published by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India in respect of EA audit and CERA audit under Chapter 17 is that the idea behind such conduct of verification is to reasonably […]
