Bombay High Court
State Can’t Retain Excess Stamp Duty Citing Limitation: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Nanji Dana Patel Versus State of Maharashtra
The Bombay High Court has held that the fiscal l is is not an adversarial proceeding but if a particular person is entitled to refund, since he has paid the excess tax then certainly the State cannot retain it. Therefore, the belated application made by the petitioner for refund of the stamp duty is required to be considered on merits by condoning the delay in making the application.
Bombay High Court Quashes ADG-DGGI Unreasoned Attachment Order
Case Title: Global Tabacc Legacy v/s Union of India
The Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench has quashed the Attachment Orders passed by the Commissioner/ADG-DGGI, being bereft of any reason for forming an opinion.
Telangana High Court
Telangana High Court Quashes Show-Cause Notice Demanding Tax Already Settled Under Amnesty Scheme
Case Title: ACME Cleantech Solutions Private Limited Versus Deputy Commissioner (ST) STU-1
The Telangana High Court has allowed a writ petition challenging the legality and validity of a show-cause notice demanding tax already settled by the Petitioner under the Amnesty Scheme of the State Government. Consequently, the Show Cause Notices seeking to reassess or revise the tax liability that stood settled by way of an Amnesty scheme were quashed.
Gauhati High Court
Case Title: Commissioner Of Central Excise And Service Tax Versus M/S North Eastern Cables And Conductors Private Limited
The Gauhati High Court while upholding the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has observed that the demand is not sustainable against the assessee as the assessee disclosed cenvat credit availment details and there was no intention of service tax evasion.
CESTAT
No Evidence Of Flow Back Of Money To Buyer In UAE; CESTAT Accepts Shipping Bill Value
Case Title: M/s Universal Offset Versus Commissioner of Customs (Export)
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) while accepting the value of the shipping bill held that there was no evidence of flow back of money to buyers in UAE.
Case Title: M/s. Tridev Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Goods
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the appellant-manufacturer had contravened the provisions of Rule 4, 6, 8,10, 11 and 12 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 by not recording its production of finished goods found short during the physical verification and not determining the central excise duty on the goods found short.
Case Title: M/s India Yamaha Motor Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Goods & Services Tax, Greater Noida
The Allahabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that merely because Section 35F restricts the pre-deposit amount as Rs.10 crore, does not mean that Assessee, Yamaha Motor will not be entitled for interest on refund of pre-deposit amount under Section 35FF even if it paid the pre-deposit amount more than Rs.10 crore.
Case Title: M/s Lanxess India Private Limited Versus C.C. Ahmedabad
The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed the declared transaction cost and redetermination of assessable value under Customs Act accepting the explanation that prices of O-Chloro Benzonitrile sky-rocketed, prices cooled down.
Case Title: Vraj Construction Versus Commissioner of C.E. & S.T.-Surat-i
The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no service tax payable on works contract service for building construction in relation to electricity transmission.
Case Title: M/s VLCC Healthcare Ltd. Versus Commissioner, CGST, Allahabad
The Allahabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that service tax department cannot force 6% payment on value of exempted products when opted to reverse proportionate credit of exempted service.
Case Title: M/s Airbnb Payments India Private Limited Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Gurugram
In a major relief to Airbnb Payments, the Chandigarh Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the payment processing services not ‘intermediary services’, the assessee-Airbnb Payments is not liable to pay service tax.
Case Title: M/s.Life Care Hospital Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that service charges taken by hospitals from medical shops are covered by health care services, no service tax payable.
Excise Duty Demands Towards Shortage Found During Stock Verification Is Not Sustainable: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s. Premier Power Products (CAL) Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commr. of Central Excise, Haldia Commissionerate
The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the excise duty demands towards the shortage found during the stock taking is legally not sustainable.
Penalty/Late Delivery Charges Not Subjected To Service Tax: CESTAT
Case Title: Mangalam Cement Limited Versus Commissioner Of Central Goods Service Tax, Central Excise, Udaipur
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that penalty/late delivery charges cannot be subjected to Service Tax.
Interest Demand Can’t Be Quashed On Basis Of Discharge Certificate Under SVLDRS Scheme: CESTAT
Case Title: Savita Oil Technologies Ltd Versus C.C.E. & S.T.-Daman
The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT) has held that demand of interest cannot be quashed merely on the basis of discharge certificate under Sabka Vishwas – (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS Scheme).
Dept. To Prove Service Providers Showing Different Taxable Values To CBDT And CBIC: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s. Joshi Tax Consultancy & Services v/s Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Dehradun
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) had held that the burden lies on the department to prove service providers showing different taxable values to the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) and Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC).
No Service Tax Payable On Providing Visa Consultancy Services: CESTAT
Case Title: Sunrise Immigration Consultants Private Limited v/s Commissioner of Central Excise and Central Goods & Service Tax, Chandigarh
The Chandigarh Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no service tax payable on providing visa consultancy services.
CBIC
Circular No.13/2024-Custom
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has issued a circular in respect of implementation of automation in the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty or for Specified End Use) Rules, 2022 in respect of Export Oriented Units (EOUs).
Instruction No. 20/2024-Customs
Recently, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has issued the instructions stating that the implicating customs brokers as co-noticee in cases involving interpretative disputes to be avoided.
Excise Duty Exemption On Petrol & Diesel When Exported To Bhutan: CBIC
Notification No. 24/2024-Central Excise
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC) has amended Notification No. 10/2022-Central Excise, dated the 30th June, 2022 to exempt export of Petrol and Diesel to Bhutan
