Goods and Services Tax : Explains when recovery proceedings are triggered after a confirmed tax demand. Highlights that non-payment within the prescribed p...
Excise Duty : CESTAT remands Kohler India case, stating Supreme Court's Safari Retreats judgment under CGST cannot be mechanically applied to CE...
Goods and Services Tax : An overview of India's pre-GST excise duty and CENVAT credit system, explaining how taxes were levied, credits claimed, and the ra...
Excise Duty : The Supreme Court upholds CENVAT credit for telecom infrastructure, ruling in favor of telecom operators on towers and shelters....
Excise Duty : Explore the Madras High Courts decision in India Cement Limited v. Commissioner of Customs, allowing Cenvat credit for electricity...
Excise Duty : Introduction of CENVAT credit rules across goods and services in the year 2004 was one of the major steps in indirect taxes reform...
Excise Duty : We observed instances of non-submission of various prescribed returns by the assessees. Non-submission of returns would hinder th...
Excise Duty : However, the said goods would be exempt from excise duty subject to non availment of Cenvat credit on input. [Notification No 30/2...
Excise Duty : CESTAT Chennai held that CENVAT credit on outward transportation and insurance services cannot be denied where goods are sold on F...
Excise Duty : CESTAT Mumbai upheld demand, interest, and penalty for failure to reverse SAD Cenvat credit on imported inputs transferred between...
Excise Duty : The Tribunal found that the Settlement Commission’s duty calculations did not establish any CVD component for certain advance li...
Service Tax : CESTAT Mumbai held that recovery proceedings and penalty were unsustainable where inadmissible CENVAT credit was reversed before i...
Service Tax : CESTAT Chennai ruled that the BOOT water transmission agreement was a single indivisible works contract and not a trading activity...
Service Tax : Is reversal under rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 additionally required for all the services specified in notification 2...
Goods and Services Tax : The CENVAT credit of service tax paid under section 66B of the Finance Act, 1994 was available as transitional credit under sectio...
Excise Duty : CENVAT credit. - (1) A manufacturer or producer of final products shall be allowed to take credit (hereinafter referred to as the ...
Excise Duty : I am directed to invite your attention to the landmark judgement of the CESTAT Larger Bench in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. V/s...
Excise Duty : It has been brought to the notice of the Board that some of the manufacturers of exempted goods are exporting such goods under bon...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Ultra Tech Cement Limited (CESTAT Kolkata) Respondent submits that when the demand itself is not sustainable, the question of imposing penalty does not arise. He further submits that the impugned order has erroneously invoked the extended period of limitation under Section 11A(1) of the Act on the ground of willful […]
Refund of Service Tax Cenvat credit was denied without issue of any show cause notice. Such an order is not sustainable in law.
Rule 3(7)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules (CCR) applies only the duty has been paid at the concessional rate prescribed in Serial No. 2 of Notification No. 23/2003-CE dated 31/03/2003.
Appellants are not the manufacturer of Aluminium scrap and they have only imported the scrap for manufacture of Aluminium ingots.
CESTAT Chennai held that relevant date of filing refund claim under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules in case of export of service is the date of realization of the foreign exchange.
Credit availed by an assessee cannot be denied or varied on the ground that the classification of service should have been made in a different category by the provider of service.
CESTAT Mumbai held that unless and until the assessment made at the dealer’s end is revised or altered, the Cenvat credit availed on the basis of invoices by the recipient’s unit cannot denied/whittled down.
CESTAT Delhi held that as electricity is not excisable goods under section 2(d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 hence rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules (CCR) would not be applicable.
CESTAT held that unless CENVAT Credit availed by the appellant has not been recovered by way of issue of show cause notice invoking Rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the CENVAT Credit available on the books of account cannot be rejected when it is accumulated on account of export of Service.
CESTAT held that penalty under Rule 15(1) on the present appellant, who is merely an employee of the Company, is not sustainable.
