CESTAT Half Yearly Digest: January To June 2024 - PART II

CESTAT Allows Refund Of Service Tax Paid On Cancelled Bookings Of FlatsCase Title: Kanakia Spaces Reality Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner Of Cgst & Central Excise, MumbaiThe Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed the refund of service tax paid on cancelled bookings of flats.Freight/Insurance Amount Is Not Includible In Assessable Value Of Goods For Charging Excise Duty: CESTATCase Title: Panama Petrochem Ltd. Versus Commissioner of C.E. & S.T.-DamanThe Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the freight or insurance amount is not included in the assessable value of the goods for charging excise duty.Cross-Examination Necessary For Arriving At Fair Trial, It Is Not Whims Of Adjudicating Authority To Allow Or Reject Request: CESTATCase Title: Shri Abbasbhai Teherali Bharmal Versus Commissioner of C.E. & S.T.-RajkotThe Ahmedabad bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that cross-examination is necessary for arriving at a fair trial.Service Tax Not Payable On Flats Constructed Prior To 01.07.2010, Having Less Than 12 Flats: CESTATCase Title: M/s. Sandeep N Savani Versus Commissioner of GST & Central ExciseThe Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that there is no tax liability on the appellant for the impugned flats constructed prior to July 1, 2010, having less than 12 units or flats.Admissibility Of Discounts Passed On To Buyers Subsequent To Clearance, Is Eligible Deduction For Determination Of Assessable Value: CESTATCase Title: M/s. Steel Authority of India Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise and Service TaxThe Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the admissibility of discounts that were passed on to the buyers and were known at the time of clearance of goods is an eligible deduction for the purpose of determining the assessable value.Intention To Smuggle Prohibited Goods Can't Be Equated With Attempt To Export Prohibited Goods: CESTATCase Title: Sh Mohammed Mustafa Versus Pr. Commissioner of Customs HyderabadThe Hyderabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that intention to smuggle prohibited goods cannot be equated with an attempt to export prohibited goods.No Service Tax Can Be Demanded On Sale Of Goods Or By Way Of Including Value Of Goods In The Service: CESTATCase Title: Hamon Shriram Cottrel Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of C.E. & S.T.-VapiThe Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no service tax can be demanded on the sale of goods or by way of including the value of goods in the service.Statements Recorded Under Section 108 Of Customs Act, 1962 Are Admissible Before Court Of Law: CESTATCase Title: M/s.GND Cargo Movers Versus Commissioner of CustomsThe Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, are admissible before a court of law.Intention To Smuggle Prohibited Goods Can't Be Equated With Attempt To Export Prohibited Goods: CESTATCase Title: Sh Mohammed Mustafa Versus Pr. Commissioner of Customs HyderabadThe Hyderabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that intention to smuggle prohibited goods cannot be equated with an attempt to export prohibited goods.Technical Assistance For Manufacture Of Aircraft & Engines Not Covered Under IPR-Services: CESTATCase Title: M/s. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service TaxThe Kolkata Bench of Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that technical assistance for the manufacture of aircraft and engines is not covered under the category of "Intellectual Property Services" (IPR-Services).Import Of Second Hand Medical Devices Having Minimum Residual Life Of 5 Years Or More Are Not E-Waste/Hazardous Waste: CESTATCase Title: Nano Hospitals Pvt. Ltd. Versus Principal Commissioner of Customs Hyderabad - CustomsThe Hyderabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that used medical devices with a minimum residual life of 5 years or more are not e-waste or hazardous waste.Online Ticketing Platform Under Aegis Of BookMyShow Not Receiving Any Consideration From Card Companies, No Service Tax Payable: CESTATCase Title: Bigtree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax VI, MumbaiThe Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the online ticketing platform under the aegis of BookmMyShow is not receiving any consideration from card companies, and no service tax is payable.18% IGST Is Applicable On Nutrition/Dietary Supplements: CESTATCase Title: Bright Performance Nutrition Versus Commissioner...

CESTAT Half Yearly Digest: January To June 2024 - PART II

Mariya Paliwala

Tags