Knowledge & Intention Must Be Present Before Imposing Penalty U/S 114AA Of Customs Act For Obtaining Undue Export Advantage: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that knowledge and intention must be there to impose penalty under Section 114AA of Customs Act. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that “Knowledge and intention is sine qua non for imposing penalty under section 114AA of...

Service Tax Not Leviable On Hostel Fees Received For Non-Residential Courses In Coaching Institute: CESTAT

The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that service tax is not leviable on hostel fees received for non-residential courses in coaching institute. The Bench of Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) and K. Anpazhakan (Technical Member) has observed that “the stand-alone hostel charges collected for non-residential courses, have...

Actual Figures Can Be Considered To Determine Service Tax Payable By Assessee If Books Of Accounts Show Higher Figures Than Statutory Returns: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that actual figures can be considered for determining service tax payable by assessee if books of accounts show higher figures than statutory returns. The Bench of Justices Binu Tamta (Judicial) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical) has observed that, “If the books of accounts show higher...

No Exporter Has Obligation To Either Anticipate Or Conform To Views Of DRI In Classifying Goods In Shipping Bills: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that no exporter has an obligation to either anticipate or to conform to views of DRI in classifying goods in shipping bills. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical) has observed that, “no exporter has any obligation to anticipate any views of DRI, audit...

Admissibility Of Printouts From Seized Electronic Evidence Requires Certificate U/S 36B Of Central Excise Act: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that admissibility of printouts from seized electronic evidence requires certificate under Section 36B of the Central Excise Act. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical) has observed that, “that a printout generated from a secondary electronic evidence...

12% IGST Is Leviable On Imported 'Lemoneez' Drink: CESTAT

The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that 12% IGST is leviable on imported 'Lemoneez'. The Bench of Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) and K. Anpazhakan (Technical Member) was addressing the issue of whether 'Lemoneez' is appropriately classifiable under residuary item 2106 90 19 as a soft drink concentrate [under miscellaneous...

Penalty Can't Be Imposed U/S 114AA Of Customs Act On Broker Merely For Failing To Physically Verify Importer's Premises: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that penalty can't be imposed under Section 114AA Customs Act on customs broker merely for failing to physically verify the importer's premises. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) has observed that “the allegations that the appellant...

Consultancy Services Rendered To Foreign University/Foreign Group Entity Are Not “Intermediary Services”; Service Tax Not Leviable: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the consultancy services rendered by the assessee to the foreign university/foreign group entity do not fall under the category of “intermediary services” and the assessee are eligible for the benefit of “export of services”. The Bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and...

Disputed Amount Paid Under Protest Much After Clearance Of Goods Is Not Covered Under Unjust Enrichment: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that disputed amount paid under protest much after clearance of goods is not covered by unjust enrichment. The Bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) has observed that “once the supplies have already been made, any amount paid thereafter, as tax or deposit, the burden of such amount cannot...

Subscription & Redemption Of Liquid Mutual Fund Units Can't Be Termed As “Trading Of Goods”, CENVAT Credit Admissible: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that subscription and redemption of liquid mutual fund units can't be termed as “trading of goods”. The Bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) has observed that the activity of investment in mutual funds does not involve the presence of a...

Service Tax Chargeable On Commission Received By Distributor From Company On Products Purchased By Sales Group: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that service tax would be chargeable on the commission received by a Distributor from Amway on the products purchased by his sales group. The Bench of Dr. Rachna Gupta (Judicial) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical) observed that “the assessee is an individual, who cannot be faulted if...

Central Excise Tariff Act | Test Reports Justifying Reclassification Must Be Disclosed to Manufacturer : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court ruled that when a test report forms the basis for reclassification of the petrochemical products, necessitating a higher duty, than the copy of such test reports ought to be furnished to the manufacturer-taxpayer. The bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan set aside the ₹2.15 crore central excise duty demand against M/s Oswal Petrochemicals Ltd., holding that...