Service Tax : Understand the CESTAT Ahmedabad ruling in Vishal Tansukhbhai Gohel vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST. No service tax on freig...
Service Tax : CESTAT Ahmedabad ruling in Shakti Enterprise vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST clarifies that CHA's reimbursable expenses are...
Custom Duty : CESTAT, Allahabad penalizes Commissioner for delaying Tribunal order implementation. Rs. 2,00,000 penalty imposed, and contempt pr...
Service Tax : Dive into the legal battle over corporate guarantees' taxability as Business Auxiliary Service. Explore the CESTAT's decision, the...
Custom Duty : CESTAT Bangalore's ruling in case of Rafeek K.T. v. Commissioner of Customs, emphasizing need for substantial evidence to impose p...
CA, CS, CMA : CESTAT e-Filing Software User Manual explains about New User Registration, User Home Page Navigation, Filing, (Petition/Appeal) ...
Goods and Services Tax : This is the fourth year since the introduction of GST in July, 2017. Despite a sizeable liquidation of appeals under the Sabka Vis...
Excise Duty : The Union Cabinet today gave its approval for setting up six additional Benches of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate T...
Service Tax : The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal has directed JetLite (formerly Sahara Airlines Ltd) to pay Rs 100 crore (Rs 1...
Excise Duty : RECENTLY the President of India was pleased to discharge Hon'ble member of the CESTAT Mr. PK Das, just a day before he was to comp...
Service Tax : CESTAT Delhi held that granting “call option” is not an activity of rendering service. Thus, appellant has wrongly been held t...
Custom Duty : CESTAT Delhi held that imposition of penalty and revocation of customs broker license justified as customs broker abetted the ille...
Custom Duty : CESTAT Chennai rejection of refund claim merely for non-mentioning of period particulars in CA’s certificate unjustifiable as re...
Service Tax : Oceanic Consultants Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner or Central Excise And Service Tax (CESTAT Chandigarh) CESTAT Chandigarh held that Indi...
Service Tax : Held that the appellant has satisfied all the conditions for treating the service as export of service but there is a need to veri...
Custom Duty : Read Notification No. 02/2023 from CESTAT, New Delhi, introducing virtual hearings. Learn about the procedure, technical requireme...
Goods and Services Tax : Applications are being invited for 2 anticipated vacancies of Member (Technical) and 4 anticipated vacancies of Member (Judicial) ...
CA, CS, CMA : Representations have been received from the Bar Associations requesting for physical hearing of appeals. As there is improvement i...
Custom Duty : F No. 01(05)/Circular/CESTAT/2021 Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Block No. 2, R.K. Puram, New Delhi-11006...
Goods and Services Tax : Representations have been received from the Bar Associations at Mumbai, Bangalore, Ahmedabad, Chandigarh and Hyderabad Benches of ...
Assessee was justified in claiming exemption from payment of integrated tax under the Exemption Notification on re-import of repaired parts/ aircrafts into India during the period commencing August 2017 to March 2019.
Initially, the adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim holding that the appellant has not contested the service tax liability, therefore, the refund claim of service tax paid is not admissible.
M/s. Tinplate Company of India Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Kolkata) Conclusion: Assessee adid not receive any amount from TSL as and by way of consignment agent or towards providing any consignment agency service under the consignment agency agreement and also, assessee had cleared the converted goods on payment of […]
No service tax was applicable on sizing operation activity as sizing of coal was an incidental and ancillary process to make coal marketable and thus complete ‘manufacture’ of coal and to make it into ‘excisable goods’ as per Section 2(d) of the Central Excise Act.
1. Retaining by-products/scrap by job-worker – GST applicable? The High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Shirdiri Sainath Industries Vs DCST 2020-TIOL-2052-HC-AP-GST has held including the value of by-products to the milling charges and assessing tax is legally unsustainable. Fact: Rice milling done on job work bases. milling charges was per quintal basis […]
BST Infratech Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST & Excise, Bolpur Commissionerate (CESTAT Kolkata) We find that no physical verification of input consumption qua finished goods manufactured thereto was carried out by the department. The duty has been demanded on the basis of audit objection without causing any investigation. It is our considered view that the […]
No service tax applicable to salary paid to employees under the secondment agreement as persons seconded to assessee working in the capacity of employees and payment of salaries etc was made to such employees by group companies only for disbursement purposes and hence employee-employer relationship exist and the whole arrangement between assessee and its group companies did not fall under the taxable service of manpower recruitment or supply agency service as defined under the Finance Act, 1994.
South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The Principal Bench of Hon’ble CESTAT set aside the Service Tax demand of Rs. 32.76 Crores approx., plus equal penalty and applicable interest, on the amount of Liquidated Damages / Forfeiture of EMD / Penalty recovered from the various contractors & […]
Honda Cars India Ltd. Vs The Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The charge leveled against the appellant, in the show cause notice, that JPY 130,000,000/- was paid towards the first installment mentioned in the Technical Agreement/ Model Agreement amounting to JPY 400,000,000/- is factually incorrect. As noticed above, JPY 130,000,000/- was paid […]
Metlife Global Operations Support Center Private Limited Vs Commissioner, Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The substantive benefit of service tax exemption provided under section 26 of the SEZ Act read with rule 31 of the SEZ Rules cannot be denied on procedural grounds. It is not in dispute that the appellant was not required to deposit […]
