Indo Unique Flame Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Mumbai) The Adjudicating Authority has proceeded to determine tax liability under section 73 of Finance Act, 1994, along with appropriate interest under section 75 of Finance Act, 1994, and impose penalties under section 77 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994 without the […]
Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012 is not a provision for charging of tax; it is limited to determination of location of taxable entity as an adjunct to the charging provision in section 66 B of Finance Act, 1994. The impugned order has not evaluated the impugned activity from that perspective.
Reliance Industries Ltd Vs Commissioner Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Mumbai) The two issues that have been referred to the Larger Bench of the Tribunal are, therefore, answered in following manner: (i) The answer to the first issue would be: a. The Bombay High Court in Coca Cola India and Ultratech Cement has settled […]
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 […]
