Supreme Court Dismisses Rs 244 Crore Service Tax Plea Against Bharti Airtel Over Employee Scheme

The Supreme Court has recently dismissed a nearly Rs 244 crore service tax appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Gurugram, against telecom giant Bharti Airtel Ltd. The dispute concerned the company's Airtel Employees Services Scheme (AESS), which offered free or discounted telecom services to its employees.The appeal challenged a January 27, 2025 order of the...

Advertisement, Promotional And Management Service Payments Excluded From Customs Valuation: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that Advertisement and Promotional Expenses and Management Service Fees (APE and MSF) payments are independent transactions, and cannot be included in the transaction value of imported goods. The issue before the Tribunal was whether the advertisement and promotional expenses incurred by...

Customs | Importer Cannot Be Penalised For Misdeclaration Merely Because Other Importers Declared High Prices For Similar Goods: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that an importer cannot be penalised for misdeclaration merely because other importers declared high prices for similar goods under the Customs Valuation Rules. Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) opined that the mere fact that another importer...

Customs | Drawback Cannot Be Denied On Grounds Of Alleged Forgery By Foreign Buyer Once Goods Are Exported: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that drawback cannot be denied on the grounds of alleged forgery by a foreign buyer after goods are exported under the Customs & Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules 1995. The single bench consists of (Judicial Member) opined that any forgery, if revealed during a further...

Customs Act | Electronic Evidence From Unsealed CPU Without Certificate U/S 139C Cannot Form Basis Of Assessment: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that electronic evidence from an unsealed CPU without any Section 139C certificate under the Customs Act cannot form the basis of assessment. Dr. Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) opined that the computer/ CPU was not sealed at the time of panchnama and...

Customs | Confiscation, Penalty & Fine Can't Be Imposed On IGST Demand Arising From Breach Of Pre-Import Condition: CESTAT

The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that confiscation, penalty & fine cannot be imposed on IGST (Integrated Goods and Services Tax) demand arising from breach of pre-import condition under Customs Act. Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) and C J Mathew (Technical Member) opined that the IGST demand arose because of the breach of...

Differential Duty Paid For Provisional Release Not Pre-Deposit; Refund Interest Payable Only At 6% U/S 27A Customs Act: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the differential duty paid for provisional release is not a pre-deposit. Hence, refund interest payable only at 6% U/S 27A Customs Act, not 12% U/S 35FF Central Excise Act. Dr. Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) opined that all those goods were ordered to be released as per the provisions...

Supreme Court Dismisses Customs' Appeal Seeking Rs 93 Lakh Duty On Lulu Malls' Imported Trampolines

The Supreme Court recently (October 31) dismissed an appeal filed by the Customs Department challenging the classification and valuation of imported amusement equipment, including trampolines, by Lulu International Shopping Malls Pvt Ltd.A bench of Justices Pankaj Mittal and Prasanna B Varale held that there was no error in the classification of the trampolines and other equipment under...

Customs | AIFTA Exemption Cannot Be Denied Without Verifying Certificate Of Origin: CESTAT

The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the AIFTA (ASEAN-India Free Trade Agreement) exemption cannot be denied without verifying the certificate of origin. Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) and C J Mathew (Technical Member) noted that there is no allegation, let alone ascertainment, that the 'certificate of origin' corresponding...

Customs | FOB Value Determined Between Parties Protected By Privity Of Contract; Cannot Be Modified By Stranger: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the FOB (Free On Board) value determined between the parties is protected by privity of contract, and it cannot be modified by a stranger to the contract. Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) opined that FOB value is the product of...

CENVAT Credit Rules | Variable 'P' Under Rule 6(3A) Refers Only To Common Credit, Not Total Credit, Prior To 01.04.2016: CESTAT

The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that variable 'P' under Rule 6(3A) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, refers only to common credit, not total credit, prior to 01.04.2016. P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical Member) were addressing the issue of whether, for the tax periods April 2012 to March 2014,...

SSI Exemption Can't Be Denied Merely For Using Common/Assigned Brand Names: CESTAT

The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that SSI (Small Scale Industry) Exemption can't be denied merely for using common/assigned brand names. The Tribunal opined that once a brand name is legally assigned or transferred, the SSI unit becomes the “owner” of the brand. Therefore, it is no longer the “brand name of...