The Tribunal held that including income from scrap sale, already subject to excise duty, in service tax valuation would lead to double taxation. It ruled that such addition is not permissible and set aside the demand.
The Tribunal ruled that when customs authorities had examined and accepted the classification earlier, suppression of facts cannot be alleged. The extended period of limitation was therefore held to be invalid.
The Tribunal held that mere suspicion of bogus transactions without supporting evidence cannot justify addition under section 68. Proper documentation of sales and purchases led to deletion of the addition.
The Tribunal remanded the matter to clarify whether import of fabrics was permitted under the Letter of Permission. The ruling highlights the impact of unclear authorizations on exemption claims.
The Tribunal held that delay alone cannot justify rejection of a statutory deduction claim raised in appeal. It directed fresh verification to determine eligibility on merits.
The Tribunal held that works contract and manpower services were integrally linked to electricity transmission. It ruled such services are covered under the negative list exemption.
The Tribunal held that a claim admitted at the appellate stage must be examined on merits and cannot be denied merely due to time lapse. The case was remanded for fresh verification.
The Tribunal held that moulds and dies supplied by customers form part of assessable value as additional consideration. It clarified that their amortised cost must be included in valuation of finished goods.
The issue was whether demonetization cash deposits were unexplained. The Tribunal held that deposits from recorded business sales cannot be taxed under Section 68.
The Tribunal held that exemption cannot be denied based on a re-export condition imposed through a DGH certificate when such a requirement is absent in the notification.
