The Hon’ble Madras High Court ('HC') in Anjappar Chettinad A/C Restaurants v. Joint Commissioner [W.P. Nos. 13469 of 2020, 28789 & 28095 of 2019 and 1748 & 5935 of 2021 decided on May 20, 2021] held that provision of food and drink to be taken-away i
Present order disposes of four appeals arising out of same Show Cause Notice adjudicated by common order that is theorder under challenge bearing No.0042-15-16 dated 23.03.2016. The facts in brief for disposal of the impugned appeals are asfollows:-
The Order of Commissioner (Appeals) bearing No.151/2019dated 14.05.2019 has been assailed vide the impugned appeal.The relevant factual matrix for the present appeal is that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of tyres. The Department observe
The order of Commissioner (Appeals) bearing No. 668(CRM)ST/JDR/2019 dated 11.07.2019 has been assailed vide the impugned appeal. The facts, in brief, as are required for adjudication are as follows:
This appeal has been filed against order-in-appeal whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) have upheld the credit of refund amount to Consumer Welfare Fund, holding that the refund claim is hit by unjust enrichment. The Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded
The issue involved in this appeal is whether interest on differential amount of service tax due to revision of price of storage charges is payable under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994.
Learned Counsel for the appellant has mentioned that benefit of Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme of 2019 has already been availed by the appellant. The copy of discharge certificate/SVLDRS Form No. - 4 is mentioned to have been mailed
The appellant has settled their dispute with the respondent- Department under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019.
The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Sanjiv Madhusudan Shah v. Assistant Commissioner of Central and Service Tax and ors. [Writ Petition (L) No. 646 of 2021 dated January 12, 2021] has stayed a demand notice issued, seeking to levy service tax upon an Ad
The Hon'ble CESTAT Ahmedabad, in Pujan Builders Engineers & Contractors v. CCE and ST Vadodara-II [Service Tax Appeal No. 10516 of 2020, decided on February 11, 2021] set aside the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) rejecting the refund claim