Indian Tax Solutions
Home | Why Register? | Register | Subscription | Contact Us | Discussion Board | Pay Online
Last Updated : Tuesday 22nd April, 2014 - 3:02pm

Clarification regarding treatment of expenditure incurred for development of roads/highways in BOT agreements under Income-tax Act, 1961 Continue reading | Exchange Rate for the purpose of import and export with effect from 18 th April, 2014 Continue reading | Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) Continue reading | Amendment in the date of effect for implementation of Self-certification regarding compliance of bar-coding requirements on secondary and tertiary level packaging on export consignment of pharmaceuticals and drugs. Continue reading | CBEC hikes tariff value of gold and silver - reduces for Crude Soya oil and RBD Palmolein Continue reading | Export of pulses to Republic of Maldives in terms of Notification No. 77 of 27.03.2014 would be permitted through M/s. PEC Ltd. Continue reading | Manual filing and processing of Bills of Entry/Shipping Bills - stringent checks required to prevent misuse Continue reading | Aurangabad notified for unloading of imported goods and loading of export goods or any class of such goods Continue reading | Import of Pesticides - Common Order dated 05.09.2013 passed by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in various Civil Applications Continue reading | I-T return filed after last date needs CBDT approval Continue reading |
PEO company
Category Archives: CESTAT


2014-ITS-605-CESTAT-M/s. Nandan Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- C.C.E. & S.T. Daman , Date of Decision: 22.04.2014

We find that in the case of Gandhi Fibers, this bench vide order dt. 11.06.2009 relying upon the judgment of Virlon Textile Mills Ltd. had allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that assessee is eligible to clear goods to Domestic Tariff Area by taking 50% of the deemed exports value as their eligibility. It is noticed that this judgment of the Tribunal has attained finality in the hands of Apex Court. Since the issue is covered by the judgment of Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Gandhi Fibers and as also in the case of NBM Industries and Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd., we find that the impugned order is incorrect. Continue reading

2014-ITS-604-CESTAT-M/s. Essar Oil Ltd. -Vs- C.C.E. & S.T. Rajkot. , dt. 22.04.2014

It is also undisputed that they have reversed the said amount. In our view, all the arguments made by the Ld. Counsel that interest cannot be charged, would not carry the case any further, as the Apex Court in the case of Indswift Laboratories Ltd. (Supra), was specifically interpreting the provisions of Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and held that even if the credit is taken and subsequently reversed, interest liability arises. Respectfully following the ratio laid down, we hold that the appellant is liable to pay the interest on the amount of Rs.39,02,938/-. To that extent, the appeal filed by the appellant is rejected and impugned order to that extent is upheld Continue reading

2014-ITS-603-CESTAT-M/s. Schott Glass India Pvt. Limited -Vs- Commissioner of Central Excise & S.T., Vadodara , Dated 15.04.2014

The issue involved in this case is regarding availment of CENVAT credit of service tax paid on the services received by the appellant from Rent-a-Cab services, for transportation of their employees from their residence to the place of work and vice-versa. I find that the bench in the appellant s own case, in final order dated 22.10.2012 has taken a view which is in favour of the assessee. In an another order dated 26.10.2012, the bench has remanded the matter back to the lower authorities for appreciating evidences, if any, produced by the appellant for ascertaining non-recovery of amounts towards transportation from the employees. Continue reading

2014-ITS-630-CESTAT-Tamil Nadu Power Finance and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. -Vs- Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai , Date of Decision : 11-04-2014

The Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Union of India Vs A.K. Spintex Ltd. 2009 (234) ELT 41 (Raj.) after considering the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of S.Kumar’s Ltd. (supra) rejected the appeal filed by Revenue and observed that once the assessee leads reliable evidence about appellant’s having got passed the burden on the purchaser, and Revenue fails to rebut that evidence, the presumption enacted by Section 12B stands sufficiently rebutted and cannot survive ad infinitum. It is further observed that payment of higher amount of duty by customers who raised debit notes subsequently and credit notes also raised by the assessee, a refund of excess amount is eligible. The Tribunal in the case of CCE Hyderabad Vs TFL Quinn India Pvt. Ltd. – 2013 (294) ELT 421 (Tri.-Bang.) after considering the decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of A.K. Spintax Ltd. (supra) allowed the Revenue’s appeal on the ground that there is nothing on record to indicate that the burden was discharged beyond pale of doubt.
Continue reading

2014-ITS-602-CESTAT-M/s N.K. Overseas -Vs- CC Ahmedabad , Date of Decision:11.04.2014

It is undisputed that the appellant had filed bills of entries on 27.10.1998 and 01.01.1999 which were provisionally assessed. The Appellant filed refund claims after a favourable order from the Tribunal. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has not addressed himself to the issue in hand in a proper perspective. It is undisputed that the provisions of Section 18 talks about provisional assessment of bills of entries and any refund or shortage of duty due to finalization of bills of entries has to be made good. It is also seen that during the relevant time, Section 18 of the Customs Act did not have the clause of unjust enrichment. Continue reading

2014-ITS-601-CESTAT-CCE&ST., Ahmedabad III -Vs- Tec Papers Pvt Ltd , Date of Decision : 11/4/2014

The appellants claim that corroboration in the shape of installed capacity, electricity consumption, labour employeed etc., has not come on record, does not convince us inasmuch as it is the sufficiency of evidences on record which has to be considered and the Revenue cannot be expected to prove its case by producing direct evidence which would rarely be forthcoming. It is not necessary that the case of the clandestine removal must always be proved by referring to electricity consumption or installed capacity or labour employeed etc. In the present case, we find that M/s. Montex Dyeing & Printing Works is not disputing the recovery of challans/note books from its premises. The said entries finds sufficient corroboration in the shape of the statement of the partner and the merchant- manufacturer, which we have dealt in details in the preceding paragraph. Continue reading

2014-ITS-600-CESTAT-CCE&ST., Surat II -Vs- M/s Shabanam Synthetics (Unit 2) , Date of Decision : 11/4/2014

We are of the opinion that the aforesaid observations would be applicable in the case of captive consumption as well. To claim refund of duty it is immaterial whether the goods imported are used by the importer himself and the duty thereon passed on to the purchaser of the finished product or that the imported goods are sold as such with the incidence of tax being passed on to the buyer. In either case the principle of unjust enrichment will apply and the person responsible for paying the import duty would not be entitled to get the refund because of the plain language of Section 27 of the Act. Continue reading

2014-ITS-599-CESTAT-M/s Ronald Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd -Vs- CCE&ST., Vadodara I , Date of Decision : 11/04/2014

In the light of above factual matrix, adjustment of arrears from the rebate claim were not justified when separate appeals/stay applications were pending before the appropriate appellate authorities. Full rebate payment was due to the appellant after three months from the date (29/4/2010) of filing the rebate claim but was paid only on 13/5/2011 by the Adjudicating Authority. Interest from 29/7/2010 to 13/5/2011 is payable to the appellant as the rebate claim in fact was sanctioned on 28/7/2010 but adjusted against some arrears which were separately under litigations. This view is also fortified by the case laws relied upon by the appellant. Continue reading

2014-ITS-629-CESTAT-CCE, Chennai III -Vs- M/s. Ultratech Cements Ltd. , Date of Decision: 10.04.2014

The issue involved in this case is whether the respondents are eligible to avail CENVAT credit for the service tax paid on freight for outward transportation from the place of removal during the period March 2007. The issue is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. ABB Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bangalore 2009 (15) STR 23 (Tri. Bang) wherein it has been held that CENVAT credit is eligible on service tax paid on outward transportation service. Continue reading

2014-ITS-628-CESTAT-CCE, Madurai -Vs- M/s. TVS Srichakra Ltd , Date of Decision: 10.04.2014

Regarding the denial of credit of service tax paid on outdoor caterer, it is seen that the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CCE, Nagpur Vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. 2010 (260) ELT 369 (Bom.) held that input service credit on outdoor caterer service is eligible subject to the extent of cost of food recovered from the employees/ workers is reversed.
Continue reading

Advanced Search
Member Login

You are not currently logged in.

  Forgot Password? | Sign Up
Subscribe Newsletter
Subscribe to our newsletter and be kept with latest Indian Tax solutions.