CESTAT Mumbai held that services rendered by Marriott Hotels India Private Limited to their group company [Marriott Hong Kong] qualifies as export of services and accordingly no service tax is leviable. Thus, order quashed and appeal allowed.
The Tribunal held that Bills of Entry cannot be reassessed after goods are cleared merely to claim a refund based on a later Supreme Court decision in another case.
Tribunal holds that providing online ticket booking services does not constitute trading; service provider can retain convenience fees and claim CENVAT credit on taxable services.
CESTAT Mumbai rules that sales tax discharged at net present value under a state incentive scheme cannot be included in transaction value for central excise duty.
CESTAT ruled that absolute confiscation of prohibited goods is not valid if the goods have been re-exported before the appeal. The judgment reinforces the principle that confiscation requires the goods to be physically available.
CESTAT Mumbai held that confiscation and differential duty based on Air Cargo Complex imports and post parcel valuation were without legal authority. The order imposing penalties and confiscation was set aside.
Tribunal found that misclassification between copolymer and Homopolymer PVC was not addressed, directing the original authority to reassess ADD and penalty claims.
CESTAT Mumbai nullified a customs duty assessment on water meters due to failure to consider prior Tribunal rulings. The adjudicating authority must re-evaluate the classification accordingly.
Tribunal ruled that confiscation cannot be sustained when goods were re-exported before Revenue’s appeal, restoring the original order.
The Tribunal held that the lower authorities misread the amended notification on Chapter 31 goods and failed to show that the imports were clearly excluded. The matter was remanded for fresh examination of the exemption’s scope.
