Whether handling portion and maintenance including incineration facilities by one party on behalf of another is in the nature of providing 'Storage and Warehousing Services' falling under Section 65(105)(zza) of the Finance Act, 1994 (-the Finance Ac
The Hon-ble CESTAT, Chennai held as under: - The Adjudicating Authority had rightly computed the interest amount from the due date till the date of payment in respect of demand for the month of January, 2011, by working out interest at 13% up to M
The Hon-ble CESTAT, Bangalore held that although there is no specific 'relevant date' under Section 11B of the Excise Act to claimrefund of unutilized credit, but, that would not rule out applicability of Section 11B. Relevant date should be the date
Hon-ble Apex Court held that it cannot be the intention of the Legislature to provide rebate only on one item i.e. either on inputs or final products. It was further held that giving such restrictive meaning to Rule 18 of the Excise Rules would not o
The Hon-ble CESTAT, Mumbai held that reimbursement of the cost of obtaining and employing resources/certain expenses incurred by the Appellant on the behalf of the Group Companies cannot be regarded as consideration flowing to the Appellant towards t
The Hon-ble High Court of Patna held as under: The -Governmental authority- as defined in the Notification dated January 30, 2014, means an authority or a board or any other body set up by an Act of Parliament or State Legislature; The provisio
The transaction in question qualified as a transfer of right to use goods and, consequently, be outside definition of -service- under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act and no Service tax could be levied on such transaction.
The Hon-ble CESTAT, Mumbai heard both sides and observed the contention submitted by the Appellant that unless the commercial complex is constructed and completed in all respects, the same could not be rented out by the Appellant is a common sense.
The Hon-ble High Court of Madras relied upon the decision in the case of Sri Vinayaga Agencies Vs. the Assistant Commissioner (Ct), Chennai and another [(2013) 60 VST 283 (Mad)] and held that when the fact of Petitioner paying the taxes to his suppli
The Hon-ble CESTAT, Kolkata held that since, the Department has dropped six periodical Show Cause Notices issued for the subsequent period following the principle laid down in the Jayaswal Neco Ltd. case, that Cenvat credit is admissible on rails and
The Hon-ble CESTAT, Mumbai relying upon the case of Commissioner of Customs, Cochin Vs. Rajesh Chemicals - [2006 (196) E.L.T. 64 (Tri-Bang)], held that the provision of unjust enrichment wouldn-t be applicable as the excess amount paid by mistake was
The Hon-ble CESTAT, Mumbai has relying upon the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur Vs. Abir Steel Rolling Mills [2013 (7) TMI 405 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], held that when the proceedings against the Respondent stand concluded on payment of dis
The Hon-ble CESTAT, Delhi has relied upon the plethora of judgments and held that merely on the basis of papers/records seized allegedly containing the production & dispatch or statement of any employee/director of the Appellant accepting the facts w
The Hon-ble CESTAT, New Delhi relying upon the plethora of judgments and by observing various provisions in this regard, held that in the instant case, buyer has borne risk of damage to goods during transit and freight charges were an integral part o
The Hon-ble CESTAT, Allahabad relying upon plethora of judicial pronouncements held that in the instant case, BSNL has already paid Service tax on the SIM cards and recharge coupons sold to the Appellant and therefore, again demanding Service tax fro
The transfer of shares of an Indian company by a holding Co (Yum Asia) to another holding Co (Yum Singapore) results in change of -beneficial ownership- of shares and results in disallowance of b/fd losses even though the ultimate beneficial owner re
Even in case of substituted third proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Act which restricts the power of the ITAT to grant stay beyond 365 days -even if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee- has been struck down in Pep
Bogus Sales/ Purchases: Addition solely on the basis of information received from the sales-tax department is not sustainable. Suspicion of the highest degree cannot take the place of evidence.
The Hon-ble Apex Court held that price was genuinely revised & gets reduced by amending the MOA and there was nothing wrong on the part of the Appellant to declare the price in the BOE. Hence, Customs duty should be determined on the basis of assessa
Hon-ble Tribunal held there is no reason to differentiate between the cars imported under Carnet and the cars imported otherwise. Valuation under Section 14 of the Customs Act clearly provides that the value shall be the transaction value where the b
Updated on : 24/02/2017 10:56:01