This weekly round-up analytically summarizes the key stories of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) reported at taxscan.in, from April 13 , 2024 to April 19, 2024
The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) observed that service tax is not leviable on flats, less than 12 in units constructed prior to 01.07.2010.
A Two-Member Bench comprising M Ajit Kumar, Technical Member and P Dinesha, Judicial Member observed that “We find that there is no dispute that only four residential units / flats were constructed in this case on hand and hence, by virtue of this alone the case of the appellant does not get covered under the definition of residential units since the definition covers any complex of a building or buildings, having more than twelve residential units.”
In a ruling in favour of Indian Airlines Ltd, the New Delhi bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) has held that the cost of freight insurance is not included for calculating the duty of ATF consumed in the fuel tank of aircraft.
A Two member bench comprising Shri Justice Dilip Gupta, President and Shri P V Subba Rao, Member ( Technical ) observed that the cost of the freight, transit insurance and the landing charges being ascertainable as NIL, they cannot be included in the value of the ATF. In the appellant’s case in Customs Appeal, the Tribunal held that the cost of freight, insurance and landing charges need not be included while raising the duty on the ATF consumed in the fuel tank of the aircraft.
The Kolkata Bench of the Customs, Excuse and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) ruled that the admissibility of discounts subsequent to clearance is eligible deduction for the determination of assessable value.
A Two Member Bench comprising Ashok Jindal, Judicial Member and Rajeev Tandon, Technical Member observed that “With regard to valuation of the goods is quite clear and in terms of the law, the valuation of goods under clearance is to be done on the basis of sale price prevailing on the date of removal at the time of removal, which in the present case is the depot.”
The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) observed that the service tax is not leviable on sale of goods or by way of including value of goods in service.
A Two-Member Bench of Ramesh Nair, Judicial Member and Raju, Technical Member observed that “In the present case undisputedly there is a separate transection of sale of goods right from beginning that is much before of execution of contract and the appellant have discharged the VAT/CST. Therefore, in view of the above settled legal position the sale of goods by any stretch of imagination cannot be brought into for levy of service tax. Having observed as above we find that no service tax is payable on trading of goods in the present case, the trading of goods is not in dispute. Even post 01.07.2012 in terms of section 66D(e) of the Act trading of goods is specified under the negative list on which the service tax is not leviable.”
The New Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) held that the statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 are admissible before the court of law.
A Two-Member Bench comprising Binu Tamta, Member ( Judicial ) and P. V. Subba Rao, Member ( Technical ) observed that “Statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act are admissible before a Court of Law and in view of the admissions made in these statements, he referred to the settled principles that what is admitted need not be proved. We therefore, do not find any infirmity or perversity in the conclusion arrived at in imposing the punishment by the impugned order.”
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
