Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback for the period 27 October 2024 to 2 November 2024.
Bombay High Court – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Parle Entitled To Refund Of Excise Duty Voluntarily Paid Duty Although Not Due: Bombay High Court – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Case Title: M/s. Parle Products Ltd. Versus UOI
The Bombay High Court has held that Parle is entitled to refund of excise duty voluntarily paid duty although not due.
The bench of Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain observed that the biscuits exported by the Petitioner, Parle did not have the retail sale price in rupee embossed on the package. A person must emboss the retail sale price on the package as per the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodity) Rules 1977.
Bombay High Court Quashes Review Order Passed By State Tax Joint Commissioner Under Maharashtra Settlement Act, 2022 – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Case Title: Andreas Stihl Private Limited Versus The Joint Commissioner of State Tax
The Bombay High Court has quashed the review order passed by the state tax joint commissioner under Maharashtra Settlement Act, 2022 (Settlement Act).
The bench of Justice M. S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain has observed that in the absence of any order under Section 50 of the MVAT Act by the authorities under the Settlement Act, review orders passed by authorities under the Settlement Act conferring power upon itself powers under Section 50 of the MVAT Act is without jurisdiction and also there is no provision under the Settlement Act to adjust such refund for arriving at the amount to be considered for the settlement and, therefore, there cannot be any error in the settlement orders for the authorities to exercise review powers under Section 15 of the Settlement Act.
CESTAT – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Recovered When Obtaining Of Occupancy Certificate Of Unsold Carpet Area Was Taxable: CESTAT – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Case Title: Pioneer Housing Versus Commissioner of CGST & CE, Mumbai South
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that after obtaining Occupancy Certificate in respect of unsold carpet area for which no service tax will be leviable, cenvat credit already availed when the activity was taxable, the cenvat credit need not be recovered.
The bench of Anil G. Shakkarwar (Technical Member) has observed that Service Tax Law does not provide for levy of service tax on the flats or buildings constructed for which Occupancy Certificate is obtained. Therefore, carpet area of 21,010 square feet constructed by the appellant was not liable to levy of service tax. Revenue has invoked Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules which provides for circumstances where cenvat credit is admissible or not admissible depending on taxability or otherwise of output service.
Useless Exercise Of Adjudication And Appellate Process, Continued For More Than 10 Years At Different Forums: CESTAT Slams Dept. – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Case Title: Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s. Hitkari Hitech Fibres (P) Ltd.
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the Department without application of mind as both the adversaries sought for setting aside of the order passed by the Commissioner but what bothered us most is useless exercise of the adjudication and appellate process, that continue for more than 10 years at different Forums, when Appellant had classified its goods manufactured under Chapter 57 and Department has disputed the same but comes in appeal to get a declaration that the product is classifiable under Chapter 57 and not under Chapter 87 in which Revenue-Department has proposed and confirmed its classification through adjudication process.
No Excise Duty On Branded Readymade Garments Manufactured Before 01.03.2011: CESTAT – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Case Title: Ginza Industries Ltd. v/s Commissioner of Central Excise
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no excise duty on branded readymade garments manufactured before 01.03.2011.
The bench of Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member) and Anil G. Shakkarwar (Technical Member) has observed that the goods were manufactured before 28.02.2011 and the branded readymade garments were brought into central excise levy with effect from 01.03.2011. Central excise duty is on manufacture. The collection of duty is deferred from the point of incidence till the goods are cleared from the factory for the purpose of administrative convenience.
Food Testing ELISA Kits Not For Diagnostic Purposes On Human And Animals, No Customs Duty Exemption Applicable: CESTAT – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Case Title: M/s. Ilishan Biotech (P) Ltd. Versus Principal Commissioner of Customs
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that food testing ELISA kits are not for diagnostic purposes on humans and animals, therefore no customs duty exemption is applicable on ELISA kits.
The bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) has observed that ELISA kits imported by the appellant were not used in the evaluation of physical, biophysical or biochemical processes and states in animals and humans, and as a result, they were not diagnostic reagent/kits rather they were meant to be used for food testing and, therefore, did not fulfil the criteria to avail the benefit of expression as per the notification.
No Service Tax Payable On ‘Construction Of Residential Complexes’: CESTAT – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Case Title: Raj Construction Company Versus Commissioner Of CGST
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no service tax payable on ‘construction of residential complexes’.
The bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P. V. Subba Rao, (Technical Member) has observed that the appellant/assessee has rendered the service of construction of residential complexes as ‘works contracts’, the demand of service tax under section 65(105)(zzzh) of the Finance Act, 1994 towards ‘construction of residential complexes’ cannot be sustained.
Manufacturing Of Stainless Steel Coils Under Advance Authorisation Scheme Exempted From All Duties Under Customs Tariff Act: CESTAT – Indirect Tax Weekly Flashback
Case Title: Vishal Metal Industries Versus Commissioner of Customs, Noida
The Ahmedabad bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that manufacturing of stainless steel coils under Advance Authorisation Scheme is exempted from all duties under Customs Tariff Act.
The bench of S. S. Garg (Judicial Member) has observed that the Government of India vide Notification No. 1/2017-Customs dated 07.09.2017 imposed 18.95% CVD under Section 9 of Customs Tariff Act, but thereafter, trade associations made various representations and thereafter, the government vide Notification No. 79/2017-Cus dated 13.10.2017 exempted the CVD. DGFT also issued Notification No. 33/2015-2020 dated 13.10.2017 to exempt CVD under Advance Authorization Scheme.
For More Updates Subscribe our YouTube Channel:
