CESTAT Weekly Flashback for the period 20 October 2024 to 26 October 2024.
Table of Contents
CESTAT Quashes Sales Tax Demand On Movement Of Liquor From Manufacturing Units In Rajasthan To Depots In Bihar, Jharkhand – CESTAT Weekly Flashback
Case Title: M/s Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd. v/s The State of Rajasthan
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has quashed the sales tax demand on movement of liquor from manufacturing units in Rajasthan to depots in Bihar and Jharkhand.
The bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao, (Technical Member) has observed that the appellants had merely stock transferred beer from the manufacturing units of the appellants situated in the State of Rajasthan to the depots of the appellants situated in the State of Bihar or the State of Jharkhand. The movement of goods did not occur from the State of Rajasthan to the State of Bihar or the State of Jharkhand pursuant to the Master Agreement or the Liquor Policy.
NTPC Not Liable To Pay Service Tax On Vehicles For Transportation, Telephone Facilities: CESTAT – CESTAT Weekly Flashback
Case Title: NTPC LTD v/s Commissioner of C.E-Bharuch
The bench of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) observed that the appellant/assessee are not liable to pay service tax on the value of accommodation, vehicles for transportation, telephone facilities, etc. and it is found that as regard the issue penalty, the demand on merits is not sustainable, there is no question of imposition of penalty under Section 76. When the demand is not maintainable, there is no question of interest on the differential demand of service tax.
No Provision Under Central Excise Act, 1944 & Rules To Enable Assessee To Pay Central Excise Duty Under Protest: CESTAT – CESTAT Weekly Flashback
Case Title: M/s Yadu Sugar Ltd. v/s Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Greater Noida
The Allahabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) had rejected the refund claims barred by limitation under the Cenvat Credit Scheme and held that there is no provision under the Central Excise Act, 1944 & Rules made thereunder for the relevant period to enable them to pay Central Excise duty under protest.
No Service Tax On Reimbursable Expenses Towards Advisory Services To Group Companies: CESTAT
Case Title: Coca Cola India Inc v/s Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi
The bench of S. S. Garg (Judicial Member) And P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) has observed that in terms of Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, service tax is to be levied on the consideration for the services rendered and not for any reimbursement of expenses particularly paid to third parties.
No Service Tax Leviable If There Is Revenue-Sharing Arrangement On Principal-To-Principal Basis For Providing Healthcare Services: CESTAT
Case Title: O P Jindal Institute Of Cancer And Research v/s Commissioner of Central Excise, Rohtak
The Chandigarh Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT) has held that if there is a revenue-sharing arrangement on principal-to-principal basis to further the mutual interest of providing healthcare services to the patients, then no service tax can be levied.
Concessional Rate Of Central Excise Duty Can Be Availed On Technical Know-How Fees Taken For ‘Ready Mix Concrete’: CESTAT
Case Title: ACC Limited v/s Principal Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the concessional rate of central excise duty can be availed on technical know-how fees taken for ‘ready mix concrete’ (RMC).
The bench of S.K. Mohanty (Judicial Member) and M.M. Parthiban (Technical Member) has observed that the amount of CENVAT credit on account of other common input services and interest already paid, as they relate to reversal of CENVAT credit of other common input credit attributable to RMC units, the payments having been credited to the Government account are incorrectly appropriated to the adjudged demands by the impugned order for demand of differential Central Excise duty on RMC.
Relief To SAIL: Writing Down Inputs For Income Tax Purposes Cannot Be Equated With Writing-Off Inputs Under Rule 3 (5B) of CCR: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s. Steel Authority of India Limited v/s Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise (Audit)
In a major relief to Steel Authority of India (SAIL), the Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that writing down the inputs for Income-tax purposes cannot be equated with writing-off the inputs under Rule 3 (5B) of CCR (Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004).
CESTAT Allows Refund Of Unutilised Cenvat Credit On Closure Of Units
Case Title: M/s. Kinol Lubes Pvt. Ltd. v/s Commissioner of Central GST Respondent and Central Excise
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed the refund of unutilised cenvat credit on closure of units.
The bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) has observed that while the said request for transferring the credit amount was pending with the Department, the Central Excise Act, 1994 was repealed w.e.f. July, 2017 and as a result, the amount of cenvat credit accumulated could not be transferred to GST. The appellant had no other alternative but to seek the refund of the cenvat credit and the refund application was filed.
Softwares/Websites Development Service Or Consultancy On Internet Requires Human Intervention; Can’t Be Categorised As OIDAR Service: CESTAT
Case Title: Trivedillc Marketing Pvt Ltd V/S Commissioner Of Cgst & Central Excise Bhopal
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that softwares / Websites Development service or consultancy on the internet requires human intervention and cannot be categorised as Online Information and Data Based Access or Retrivial Services (OIDAR Service).
CESTAT Upholds Service Tax On Publicity Charges Received By Media Company Received From Intermediary Agencies
Case Title: Selvel Media Services Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has upheld the service tax on publicity charges received by media companies from intermediary agencies.
The bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) has observed that a sub-contractor would be liable to pay Service Tax even if the main contractor has discharged Service Tax liability on the activity undertaken by the sub-contractor in pursuance of the contract.
Notification Prevails Over Circular | Service Tax Exemption Can’t Be Denied Citing Absence Of End-Use Certificate: CESTAT
Case Title: Novelty Exports v/s Commissioner of C.-Ahmedabad
The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the service tax exemption cannot be denied citing absence of end-use certificate.
The bench of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) has observed that as notification is a statute enacted by the Parliament which cannot be flouted by mere issuing a circular. Therefore, the board circular No. 74/1998-Cus dated 06.10.1998 is ultra vires to the Notification 23/98-Cus. dated 02.06.1998 in Sr. No.108 which does not prescribe the condition of end use certificate.
