Cestat judgments - Page 3

Bluetooth module classifiable under CTH 8517 62 90

Minda D-Ten Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import) (CESTAT Delhi)

Minda D-Ten Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import) (CESTAT Delhi) The Bluetooth module receives radio frequency analog signals from other devices (like mobile phone), converts the radio frequency analog signals into digital signals and thereafter transmits the signals back to the Bluetooth module of mobile phone (in radio fre...

Read More

No cenvat reversal for loss of inputs/packing material in fire

Cipy Polyurethanes Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai)

Cipy Polyurethanes Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Mumbai) The decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of BPL Display Devices Ltd [2004 (174) ELT 5 (SC)] clearly lays down that once the goods are procured for an intended use, then the benefit available and availed by them should not be denied […]...

Read More

Cenvat credit Eligible on in-warranty maintenance services even after 1.4.2011

Case New Holland Construction Equipment (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi)

Case New Holland Construction Equipment (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) ‘Input service’ either prior to 01.04.2011 or w.e.f. 01.04.2011 means any service used by the manufacturer, whether directly or indirectly, or in relation to the manufacture of final products. The appellant is under an obligation to ...

Read More

Beneficial circular cannot be retrospectively withdrawn

Chittor Polyfab Ltd. Vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Central Goods And Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)

Chittor Polyfab Ltd. Vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Central Goods And Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The circular dated 08.06.2018 also cannot be made retrospectively applicable to the period in question (April 2015 to June, 2017). At the relevant time, circular No. 988/12/2014 CX dated 20.10.2014 / Circular No. 97/8/2007-CX dated 23.8.20...

Read More

Suppression of facts has to be “Wilful” for recovery of CENVAT Credit

Emaar MGF Land Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise and CGST (CESTAT Delhi)

Emaar MGF Land Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise and CGST (CESTAT Delhi) M/s. Emaar MGF Land Ltd. (Appellant) has filed the current appeal for quashing Order-In-Original No. DLI-SVTAX-001-COM-054-16-17 dated March 31, 2017 (OIO) which confirmed recovery of Central Value Added Tax Credit “CENVAT Credit) along with interest and penal...

Read More

Demand of cenvat credit by way of reversal not justified for mere provision in books

Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)

Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) The issue involved in this appeal by the assessee is whether the demand of cenvat credit by way of reversal is justified, under the provisions of Rule 3(5B) of Cenvat Credit Rules, under the fact that the appellant has made provision in […]...

Read More

Refund allowed of Unutilized Education Cess, which couldn’t be transitioned into GST

Kirloskar Toyota Textile Machinery Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore)

Appellant contended that accumulated credits of Cesses were not transitioned into GST regime due to specific restriction under Section 140(1) of CGST Act. Appellant therefore had to resort to the option of refund under existing law to avoid lapsing of credit....

Read More

Penalty justified for not fulfilling responsibility of KYC on Customs Broker

Manoj Gadhiya Vs C.C. (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

Manoj Gadhiya Vs C.C. (CESTAT Ahmedabad) It is apparent that the appellant was fully aware about the fictitious nature of the importers as the documents were being fabricated with his knowledge. He also admitted that he had never met the importer but solely relied on the documents submitted by High Sea Seller. His defense seems […]...

Read More

Service tax payable on receipts from insurance companies operating at premises of motor vehicle dealers

Kankariya Automobiles (P) Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Mumbai)

Kankariya Automobiles (P) Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (CESTAT Mumbai) From the records and narration of Learned Authorised Representative, it would appear that the appellant, an authorized dealer and service centre for motor vehicles, had provided space for insurance companies to solicit customers of insurance cont...

Read More

Refund of Service Tax was allowed with Interest allowed on export

d. Held that the department has committed an error to reject the CENVAT Credit and there lies no power or jurisdiction with the lower authority to re-adjudicate the matter again. Refund Claims of the Appellant thereby allowed....

Read More
Posted Under: Custom Duty |

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,690)
Company Law (7,672)
Custom Duty (8,723)
DGFT (4,626)
Excise Duty (4,527)
Fema / RBI (4,815)
Finance (5,183)
Income Tax (38,444)
SEBI (4,132)
Service Tax (3,778)

Search Posts by Date

September 2021
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930