CESTAT Mumbai held that merely because certain processes are carried out on the raw bees wax to make the product in a presentable and better marketable form, without significant change in the character and use between the raw bees wax and the cleaned/purified bees wax, the processes undertaken cannot result in manufacture.
Mumbai Bench of CESTAT has held that there is no estoppel in raising classification dispute in subsequent import of a product and that in the absence of appropriate classification there was nothing binding to treat previous classification as the sole option.
Swachh Bharat Cess paid on input services has to be available as Cenvat Credit and the same can be discharged by utilising Cenvat Credit and assessee was therefore entitled for the refund of it.
Lenovo (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Import)- (CESTAT Mumbai) Computer having integrated CPU, VDU, but without physical keyboard (having virtual keyboard), and weighing less than 10 kg is classifiable as portable PC under TI 84713010 and not under TI 84715000 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Tribunal found no literature to support […]
Kailash Bahiru Jadhav Vs Commissioner of Customs (Export) (CESTAT Mumbai) Customs House Agents Licensing Regulation, 2004 which is a comprehensive self-contained scheme for licensing, operations, monitoring and regulation, is a standalone provision. Indeed it is a special provision in the Customs Act, 1962 by which, a whole range of activities in connection with which proceedings […]
CESTAT Mumbai has held that demurrage was part of handling of import and export shipments of the assessee and therefore Cenvat credit of tax paid on such demurrage charges would be available. The demurrage charges were paid by the C&F service provider on behalf of the assessee and billed to him as out of pocket expenses. The Tribunal also observed that Customs Clearance Service also qualified to be input service covered by Cenvat Rule 2(l).
M/s D.A. Stuart India Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.G.S.T (CESTAT Mumbai) In the absence of a statutory provision which prescribes that registration is mandatory, the claim of the Appellant cannot be rejected and both the authorities below have committed an error in rejecting the same. In a very recent decision of the Tribunal in the matter of […]
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 […]
