It was held that that unless cost of advertising is recovered from the dealers mandatorily as a condition of dealership, the same cannot be added to the assessable value.
The appellants are manufacturer of excisable goods and were selling the products to various distributors and dealers. The appellants had agreement with some of the dealers and distributors in which they were sharing the cost of advertisement on optional basis.
The CESTAT Mumbai in the case of Vipul-S Plasticrafts P. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise held that when the rule under which duty is sought to be demanded itself has been struck down as unconstitutional by various High Courts, the show-cause notice which are based upon rule 8(3A) cannot survive and are liable to be set aside.
In the case of Commissioner Of Central Excise, Delhi Vs M/S Bajaj Motors, it was held that the outdoor catering service provided has not been used for the personal use or consumption of the employee and the said service has been provided by the employer to its employees for preserving proper working atmosphere in the factory for enhancing the productivity.
In Century Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd. – 1997 (94) E.L.T. 16, the Supreme Court held that service and maintenance charges in respect of tonners/cylinders which are durable and returnable cannot be added to the assessable value of the chlorine manufactured by the assesses and supplied to the customers in tonners/cylinders
The CESTAT Mumbai in the case of M/s Aarti Industries Ltd. vs. CCEx, Thane held that wrong availment of Cenvat credit cannot be said to a willful attempt of suppression with the intent to evade the payment of duty when the matter has been interpreted in different manner by different tribunals and courts.
Advance received as an earnest money for which bank guarantee of equal amount is given to the customers, is more in the nature of a deposit and accordingly not liable to Service tax unless it is adjusted towards the consideration for services rendered- Thermax Instrumentation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune – I [2015 (12) TMI 1222 – CESTAT MUMBAI]
Input services not only cover services of falling in the substantial part of Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 but also cover services which are covered under the inclusive part as the same having some sort of nexus with the business activity of the assesses.
The appellants are Export Oriented Unit (EOU). In 2003 they cleared the certain consignments of fabrics for purpose of export, which got damaged due to rain and had to be brought back to the factory.
The CESTAT Mumbai in the case of Precision Metals vs. CCEx held that as per the special procedure prescribed in Notification no. 214/86 job worker can get duty exemption in respect of job worked goods cleared to principal manufacturer but this exemption donot make the goods as exempt from duty because ultimately duty got paid at the principal manufacturer send
