CESTAT Monthly Round Up: June 2024
Mariya Paliwala
1 July 2024 3:30 AM GMT
Minimum Import Price Paid On Prime Pre-painted Steel Coils; CESTAT Quashes Redemption Fine, Penalty
Case Title: M/s Hindustan Distributors Versus Commissioner of Customs, Ludhiana
The Chandigarh Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the minimum import price (MIP) paid on prime pre-painted steel coils is not payable; therefore, a redemption fine and penalty are not payable.
Case Title: M/s. Valeo Friction Materials India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the royalty is not included in the transaction value of the imported raw materials to demand any differential customs duty.
Redemption Fine And Penalty Can Be Imposed On Re-export Of Prohibited Goods: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s. Scania Commercial Vehicles India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that a redemption fine and penalty can be imposed on the re-export of prohibited goods. Section 125 enables the Customs Officer to grant an option to the owner or the person from whose possession the goods have been seized to pay a fine in lieu of confiscation. In an adjudication proceeding as in the present case these are the provisions which would come into play. If the owner gets the goods released after payment of redemption fine, he may either clear it for home consumption or re-export the same subject to the relevant rules. A permission granted for re-export on the basis of a request made by the owner of the goods is outside the purview of the adjudication proceedings.
Case Title: Escorts Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the aircraft used only for providing non-scheduled passenger services is entitled to customs exemption.
Responsibility Of Customs Broker Does Not Include Keeping Continuous Surveillance On Client: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s Pushpanjali Logistics Versus Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General)
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the responsibility of the customs broker under Regulation 10(n) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 does not include keeping continuous surveillance on the client.
No Service Tax Exemption On Race Tracks Not Meant For Public Use: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s. Paramount Infraventures Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax – Delhi II
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no service tax exemption on race tracks is meant for public use.
Deduction Of Trade Discount From Assessable Value Is Admissible On Sale Transactions: CESTAT
Case Title: Mahanagar Gas Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the deduction of trade discount from assessable value is admissible on sale transactions.
Service Tax Exemption On Services Of Providing Vehicles On Hire Basis To GTA: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s. Manak Chand Agarwal Versus Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Excise and Customs, Udaipur
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the service tax exemption on services of providing vehicles on a hire basis to the Goods Transport Agency (GTA).
Case Title: Principal Commissioner of Customs Hyderabad Versus M/s Olectra Greentech Ltd.
The Hyderabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the assessee, Olectra Greentech, is eligible for Duty-Free Import Authorization (DFIA) Scheme benefits on imported lithium-ion batteries for agriculture tractor export.
Mark Engraved On Gold Coins Is House Mark And Not Brand Name, No Excise Duty Payable: Chennai CESTAT
Case Title: M/s.AVR Swarnamahal Jewelry Limited Versus The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that excise duty is not payable on the mark engraved on gold coins as it is just a house mark and not a brand name.
No Service Tax Payable On Interest Income On Overdraft/Cash Credit Facilities: Kolkata CESTAT
Case Title: The Assam Cooperative Apex Bank Ltd. Versus Commr. of CGST, Customs & Central Excise, Guwahati
The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has quashed the service tax demand on interest equivalent on overdraft or cash credit extended by cooperative banks.
Penalty Can't Be Levied When Extended Limitation Period Is Not Invokable: Chandigarh CESTAT
Case Title: M/s P S Construction Versus Commissioner
The Chandigarh Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)has held that when the extended period is not invokable, the penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, is also not leviable since the ingredients for invoking the extended period and levying the penalty under Section 78 are the same.
Recovery Provisions Of Central Excise Act Are Not Applicable To Service Tax: Chandigarh CESTAT
Case Title: Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Versus Commissioner
The Chandigarh Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)has held that recovery provisions of the Central Excise Act are not applicable to service tax.
Dept. Can't Challenge Customs Duty Demand, Below Threshold Limit Prescribed By CBIC: CESTAT
Case Title: Commissioner of Customs Versus Sedna Impex India Pvt Ltd
The Chandigarh bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), while dismissing the department's appeal, held that the department is precluded from challenging the commissioner's order if customs duty demand is below the threshold limit prescribed by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).
Mumbai CESTAT Allows CENVAT Credit To HDFC ERGO Against Duty Paid On Re-Insuring Motor Vehicle
Case Title: HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Commissioner
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed the CENVAT credit taken by the appellant, HDFC ERGO, against duty paid on re-insuring motor vehicles while providing general insurance service for the period from April 2011 to March 2012.
Case Title: M/s Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise
The Allahabad Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the product “Minute Maid Nimbu Fresh” is classifiable under Tariff Item 2202 90 20 of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule under the category of “fruit pulp or fruit juice-based drinks.”
CA Certificate Sufficient To Grant Special Additional Duty Refund Claim: CESTAT
Case Title: M/s Faxtel Systems (India) Versus Commissioner of Customs Bangalore
The Banglore Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that once a CA certificate is produced, in the absence of any allegation of fraud or collusion, such a certificate is sufficient to grant the refund claim. The Special Additional Duty (SAD) refund should not be denied merely for technical violations.
Case Title: M/s Yatra Online Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner, CGST, Gurugram
The Chandigarh Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), while quashing the service tax demand against Yatra Online, held that “convenience fee” and “cancellation fee” are recovered in the course of the provision of the service related to the booking of tickets for passage through air and not in connection with any business promotion.
Service Tax Exemption On Laying Pipelines For Water Supply And Drainage: Ahmedabad CESTAT
Case Title: Skyway Construction Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, Surat
The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no service tax is payable on laying pipelines for water supply and drainage.
Case Title: Hanuman Weaving Factory Versus Commissioner of Service Tax
The Banglore Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the service tax on commission paid to the foreign commission agents is payable under reverse charge only from April 18, 2006, and not from January 1, 2005.
Customs Brokers Not Liable Once Verification Of Address Is Completed: Delhi CESTAT
Case Title: M/S Pawan Kumar Tiwari Versus Commissioner, Customs-New Delhi
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the responsibility of the customs broker under Regulation 10(n) does not include keeping continuous surveillance on the client to ensure that he continues to operate from that address and has not changed his operations.
Case Title: M/S Divine Autotech Private Limited Versus Commissioner Of Central Tax
The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no service tax is payable on an amount received by an automobile dealer from the manufacturer as a trade discount.
