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 ...
Analysis of CESTAT Chandigarh’s ruling in S. R. Medical Agencies vs. Commissioner of Central Excise regarding service tax on BSNL commission. Learn about the implications.
CESTAT Chennai remanded the matter back for de novo adjudication as appellant couldn’t obtain specific documents due to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that demand under Clause (i) of Rule 6(3) i.e. payment of 5%/10% of the value of exempted goods unjustified as appellant rightly availed the option of sub-rule (3A) of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 i.e. reversal of proportionate cenvat credit attributed to exempted goods.
CESTAT Chennai held that seizure of gold jewellery unjustified as revenue failed to establish beyond doubt that gold jewellery seized is of foreign origin.
Analyze the CESTAT Chandigarh order in M R Beltings vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, focusing on the issue of willful suppression and its impact on excise duty demand.
CESTAT Kolkata held that naphtha used for generation of electricity which is consumed within the factory of production is eligible for Cenvat Credit.
CESTAT Delhi held that imposition of harsh punishment of revocation of Customs Broker Licence in absence of any active or passive facilitation in mis-declaration and undervaluation of imported goods unjustified.
CESTAT Bangalore held that benefit of notification no. 67/95-CE dated 16.03.1995 available in respect of molasses which is captively consumed for the manufacture of rectified spirit as rectified spirit is a dutiable excisable goods.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that appellant is not liable to pay an amount equal to 10%/6%/5% of the value of exempted goods as proportionate Cenvat credit on common input service attributed to the exempted final product already reversed.
CESTAT Mumbai held that demand alleging undervaluation of imported goods merely on the basis of retracted statements without corroborative evidences is unsustainable in law.
