CESTAT Annual Digest 2025

Service Tax Not Payable On Commission Received From Foreign Universities For Promoting & Publicizing Business In India: CESTATCase Title: TC Global India Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Director General, DGCEI, New DelhiCase Number: Service Tax Appeal No. 51355 of 2017The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that service tax is not payable on commission received from foreign universities for promoting and publicizing business in India.The Bench of Dr. Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) has observed that “the assessee is held not liable to pay service tax with reference to foreign Consultancy Income i.e. the income received from foreign universities for promoting and publicizing their business in India.”Goods Loaded Without Proper Documents Can't Be Exported Without Clearance By Customs Officials: CESTAT Kolkata Sets Aside PenaltyCase title: M/s. Samudera Shipping Line (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Port)Case no.: Customs Appeal No. 75641 of 2021Stating that goods wrongly loaded by the steamer agent could not have been exported without clearance by the Customs officials themselves, the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal at Kolkata set aside the penalty imposed under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962.Noting that the goods had been successfully exported and remittance against it had been received, the bench comprising Judicial Member R. Muralidhar and Technical Member K. Anpazhakan said the same could not have been possible without clearance by the Customs Department. Thus, the penalty imposed on Appellant would be bad in law.Excise Duty Not Payable On 'Bagasse' Which Emerges As A Waste Product During Sugar Crushing: CESTATCase Title: M/s. Sakthi Sugars Ltd. v. Commissioner of GST and Central ExciseCase Number: Excise Appeal Nos. 40479 to 40482 of 2015The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that excise duty is not payable on the Bagasse emerged as waste product during sugar crushing.The Bench of Ajayan T.V. (Judicial Member) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical Member) has observed that Bagasse emerged only as a waste product during crushing of sugarcane during the manufacturing process and though marketable, duty could not be imposed on it as there was no manufacturing activity involved.Investigation Report Is Not An Appealable Order; No Statutory Right For Hearing At Stage Of Preparation Of Investigation Report: CESTATCase Title: Hyundai Motor India Ltd. v. Commissioner of CustomsCase Number: Customs Appeal No.40501 of 2024The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that investigation report is not an appealable order and there is no statutory right for a hearing at the stage of preparation of investigation report.The Bench of P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) and M. Ajit Kumar (Technical Member) has observed that “the assessee has also not demonstrated any real prejudice caused to them by the investigation report. Merely being disappointed or dissatisfied is not enough”.Seized Gold Cannot Be Confiscated Just For Having An Invalid Letter Of Approval: CESTATCase Title: M/s Encee International NSEZ v. Commissioner of Customs, NoidaCase Number: Customs Appeal No.70692 of 2019The Allahabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that seized gold cannot be confiscated just for having an invalid letter of approval.There was a difference in the opinion between the P.K. Choudhary (Judicial Member) and Sanjiv Srivastava (Technical Member) on the issues involved in the case. Therefore, the matter was place before third member ie. S.S. Garg (Judicial Member) for determination of the same.Department Cannot Invoke Extended Period Of Limitation Merely Because Returns Were Self-Assessed: CESTATCase Title: M/s. Wellworth Project Developers Private Limited v. Commissioner of Commissioner of CGSTCase Number: Service Tax Appeal No. 50259 of 2024The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the department cannot invoke the extended period of limitation merely because the returns were self-assessed.The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P. V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that “Mere suppression of facts is not enough to invoke the extended period of limitation contemplated under the proviso to section 73(1) of the Finance Act. The suppression has to be with an intent to evade payment of service tax and for this purpose the show cause notice must specifically allege why the asseessee has suppressed facts with intent to evade payment of service tax.”Prescribed Time Limit For Filing Refund Application Cannot Be Disregarded Merely Because Tax Was Collected Without Legal Authority: CESTATCase Title: Deepak Pandey v. Commissioner of Service TaxCase Number: Service Appeal No. 52346 of 2018The New Delhi Bench of...

CESTAT Annual Digest 2025

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags