Order 79 of 2009.pdf
CBEC issues transfer order of four Commissioners;
Order 78 of 2009.pdf
CBEC issues transfer order of 11 more AC/DCs;
SERVICE TAX SECTION 2009-TIOL-657-CESTAT-DEL.pdf
M/s Daurala Organics Vs CCE, Meerut (Dated: March 23, 2009)
ST - Management Consultant Service - Assessee deputes personnel to its group company for managing day to day work - demand raised and penalty imposed - held, services provided by the assessee fall under the head 'manpower supply' but it became taxable only from 16.6.2005 and since the demand relates to earlier period, it is not sustainable - Assessee's appeal dismissed :DELHI CESTAT; 2009-TIOL-656-CESTAT-BANG.pdf
CCE & CC, Guntur Vs M/s CCL Products (India) Ltd (Dated: March 20, 2009) CE- CENVAT Credit – input services - Service Tax paid on Insurance Premium; repair of vehicles; AMC charges on telecom; courier charges - services have been received or rendered only in relation to the manufacture of final products – eligible for Credit. We find that all the services which are availed by the respondent are in respect of manufacturing activity i.e. manufacturing and exporting of coffee powder, which is their final product. We agree with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent that these services have been received or rendered only in relation to the manufacture of final products. In view of this, since the issue is squarely covered by the ratio of the decision of Tribunal and Larger Bench, we uphold the impugned orders and reject the appeals filed by the revenue. :BANGALORE CESTAT;
CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION
2009-TIOL-660-CESTAT-MUM.pdf
CCE, Pune-II Vs M/s National Dyeing & Bleaching Works(Dated: January 23, 2009)
Provisions regarding the determination of the annual production capacity have been held to be ultra vires section 3A of the CEA, 1944 by Madras High Court in case of Beauty Dyers 2003-TIOL-190-HC-Mad-CX and there is nothing on record to show that the said judgment has been stayed or modified or set aside – Penalty is not imposable under rule 96ZQ of CER, 1944 – Revenue appeal dismissed.:MUMBAI CESTAT; 2009-TIOL-659-CESTAT-MUM.pdf
Shankarrao Mohite SSG Ltd Vs CCE, Pune (Dated: January 12, 2009)
Notfn 47/94-CE(NT) – Benefit cannot be denied on the ground that the DTA clearances by a 100% EOU are governed by Chapter VA provisions in view of Tribunal decision in Kurt O' John Shoe Components 2003-TIOL-CESTAT-103-Del and Renuga Soft-X Towels 2007-TIOL-1554-CESTAT-Mad .:MUMBAI CESTAT; 2009-TIOL-658-CESTAT-AHM.pdf
M/s Nirma Ltd Vs CCE, Ahmedabad-II (Dated: February 25, 2009) Central Excise - CENVAT Credit - demand of 10% amount on exempted goods - either separate records have been maintained in respect of some of the inputs or wherever credit has been taken, the same was reversed - demand of 10% amount not sustainable.:AHMEDABAD CESTAT;
CUSTOMS SECTION
2009-TIOL-655-CESTAT-MAD.pdf
M/s Pushpanjali Silk Pvt Ltd Vs CC, Chennai (Dated: August 18, 2008)
Customs – Import – Valuation – Contemporaneous Imports – Burden of proof - There is no finding or suggestion that the price declared is not genuine and that the importer under-declared the transaction value. In such a situation the AO is not authorized to choose a higher value for assessment of the imported goods. The evidence of contemporaneous imports from the same supplier produced by the appellant has to be followed in the absence of contemporaneous evidence to reject the transaction value with the revenue. The onus to prove that the transaction value is not genuine is on the revenue. (Para 8.1) :CHENNAI CESTAT; |