Goods and Services Tax : Limitation start from date when Impugned Order in Form DRC 07 uploaded on portal and not from date of detailed order: Allahabad Hi...
Goods and Services Tax : The issue was denial of ITC transfer due to different State registrations of entities. The Court ruled that no such restriction ex...
Goods and Services Tax : The Court ruled that interest cannot be imposed in adjudication if it was not specified in the show cause notice. The decision rei...
Goods and Services Tax : The issue involved taxation of intermediary services based on supplier location. The amendment shifts place of supply to recipient...
Goods and Services Tax : Failure to serve notices at the updated registered address invalidates GST proceedings. The Court emphasized strict adherence to p...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore Supreme Court's scrutiny of whether supplying cranes for services like loading, unloading, lifting, and shifting qualifies...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore the case of Pradeep Kanthed v. Union of India where the Supreme Court issues notice to the Finance Ministry regarding the ...
Goods and Services Tax : Commissioner of Central Goods And Service Tax & Ors Vs Safari Retreats Private Limited & Ors (Supreme Court of India) The ...
Goods and Services Tax : The 45th meeting of Goods and Services Tax Council (“GST Council”) is scheduled to be held on September 17, 2021. The Ministry...
Custom Duty, Income Tax : The Karnataka High Court in M/s Pellagic Food Ingredients Private Ltd. v. Union of India [Writ Petition No. 14737/2021[T-CUS] issu...
Goods and Services Tax : The court examined whether tax paid during investigation can be treated as voluntary. It ruled that authorities must investigate c...
Goods and Services Tax : The case addressed denial of refund of VAT pre-deposit made through ITC. The Court held that Section 142(6) mandates cash refund a...
Goods and Services Tax : Gauhati High Court rules GSTR-1 vs GSTR-3B mismatch from clerical errors cannot trigger automatic tax recovery without Rule 88C pr...
Goods and Services Tax : India cuts excise duty on petrol and diesel to offset global oil price surge amid war. Move aims to reduce fuel costs, curb inflat...
Goods and Services Tax : The issue involved inability to access documents leading to ex parte assessment. The Court granted interim relief by reducing the ...
Excise Duty : Notification No. 32/2015-Central Excise Dated- 4th June, 2015 Ethanol produced from molasses generated from cane crushed in the ...
Service Tax : Circular No. 184/3/2015-ST Dated the 3rd June, 2015 It is further clarified that exemption from service tax still continues to ser...
Custom Duty : the floods in the State of Jammu and Kashmir (the State) from whole of the duty as specified under the First Schedule and whole of...
Excise Duty : Grants exemption from Basic Excise Duty to goods donated or purchased out of cash donations for the relief and rehabilitation of p...
Custom Duty : New posts have been created in the rank of Commissioners of Customs in DRI and DGCEI for adjudication of cases as investigated by ...
Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. (the Appellant) was engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicle parts falling under Chapter Headings 84 and 87 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Appellant availed Cenvat credit on inputs as well as input services used in or in relation to the manufacture of their final products.
Since there was no evidence of higher value of contemporaneous import from same sources and no allegation of mis-declaration of impugned goods, declared value cannot be enhanced merely on the basis of NIDB data. In the present case, Rule 9 of the Valuation Rules cannot be invoked.
Hercules Hoists Ltd. (the Appellant) was a manufacturer of machinery and parts thereof which were cleared on payment of Excise duty. The Appellant had also taken the responsibility of installing the machinery at the customer’s premises.
When the clearances were not on sale but were purely on stock transfer basis, there is no question of Satnoor unit having recovered the incidence of duty from Abu Road unit and, as such, the bar of unjust enrichment would not apply.
In the instant case, an Order was passed by the Ld. Commissioner, Goa confirming Service tax liability on Kala Mines and Minerals (the Appellant). Being aggrieved by the said Order, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble CESTAT, Mumbai by making a pre-deposit of 7.5% of the Service tax demand confirmed in terms of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Excise Act).
In the instant case, the three Appellants namely Matunga Gymkhana, Tahnee Heights Co-Op Housing Society Ltd. and Mittal Tower Premises Co-Operative Society (the Appellants) were running a club for their members.
Moser Baer India Ltd.(the Appellant) is the manufacturer of CDR, CD Rom, DVDR and DVD Rom, falling under Chapter Heading 85 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, at their factory situated at Noida. The Head Office of the Appellant, located at Okhla, Delhi is registered as an Input Service Distributer (ISD) in terms of Rule 2(m) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (the Credit Rules).
Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (the Appellant) was rendering Customer care services to the customers of CDMA mobile phone in India on behalf of Samsung Electronics Company Ltd., Korea (Samsung Korea).
The Appellant is a manufacturer of ready mix cement concrete and also provides men and materials to lay concrete mixture on area specified by purchaser. For the Assessment Year 2003-04, the Appellant claimed exemption treating the transaction as a Works contract under Notification G. O. Ms. No. 50/90/F6, dated December 10, 1990.
National Leather Cloth Mfg. Co. (the Petitioner) was engaged in the manufacture of Excisable goods falling under Chapter 39, 56 and 59 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the period January 1995 to March 1997, the Petitioner had utilized the Cenvat credit
