CENVAT Credit Reverses before issuance of Notice, No Cause to Initiate Proceedings under Rule 14 of CCR: CESTAT Mehta Intertrade Steels P Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Excise Raigad CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1502
The Mumbai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that no cause to initiate proceedings under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules (CCR), 2004 when Cenvat Credit reversed before the issuance of notice.
A two-member bench of Mr C J Mathew, Member (Technical) and Mr Ajay Sharma, Member (Judicial) viewed that the credit of ₹ 14,55,597 had been reversed well before the issuing of notice and there is no cause to initiate proceedings under rule 14 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Further held that the absurdity of ‘appropriating’ credit already reversed, and not restorable without prior approval from jurisdictional central excise authorities, does not seem to have occurred to the adjudicating authority as an exercise in futility. In the light of this legal position, the notice itself was void ab initio and, thereby, the penalty. The CESTAT allowed an appeal to the extent of setting aside recovery of ₹ 39,73,256 and of the penalty in full.
CENVAT Credit of Excise Duty Allowable on Renting of Immovable Property service of corporate office which is considered as an Input Service: CESTAT General Motors India Pvt Ltd vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Vadodara-ii CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1503
The Ahmedabad bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the CENVAT credit of excise duty is allowable on the renting of immovable property services of corporate office which was considered as an input service.
The Bench observed that in the case of Ramala Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, the court held that all the services which are related to the manufacture of final products are admissible input services that qualify under the definition of input services provided under Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to the CENVAT Credit on such services. The two-member bench comprising Ramesh Nair (Judicial) and Raju (Technical) quashed the denial of the CENVAT credit which was admissible to the assessee while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
Any Institute issuing any Educational qualification which is Recognised by law are Exempted from Service Tax: CESTAT M/s School of Information Technology vs Commissioner of Central Excise & CGST, Varanasi CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1504
The Allahabad bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that any institution issuing any educational qualification that was recognized by law is exempted from the service tax.
The two-member bench comprising P K Choudhary (Judicial) and Sanjiv Srivastava (Technical) held that conduct of degree courses by colleges, universities, or institutions which lead to the grant of qualifications recognized by law would be covered in the negative list and are exempted from service tax.
CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand on supply of chassis under GTA service on ground of Wrongful Inclusion of Service Category under ‘Supply Tangible Goods Service’ M/s Pranish Carriers LLP vs Commissioner of Central Excise CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1505
The Allahabad bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the service tax demand on the supply of chassis under the Goods Transport Agent (GTA) service on the ground of wrongful inclusion of service category under the supply of tangible goods service.
The two-member bench comprising P K Choudhary (Judicial) and Sanjiv Srivastava (Technical) held that the demand made in the present case after noting the payment of tax as the hand of the service recipient the same transaction goes contrary to Article 265 of the Indian Constitution and hence cannot be sustained.
Service provided for conversion of Raw Bauxite into Calcinated Bauxite does not fall under category of Business Auxiliary Service: CESTAT Meena Agency Limited vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1506
The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the service provided for the conversion of raw bauxite into calcinated bauxite did not fall under the category of Business Auxiliary Service.
The two-member bench of Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial), and C.L. Mahar, Member (Technical), held that the service provided for the conversion of raw bauxite into calcinated bauxite did not fall under the category of Business Auxiliary Service. Consequently, the bench allowed the appeal filed by the appellant Meena Agency Limited.
Top Stories CESTAT Set Asides Service Tax Demand on water front royalty charges considered as “port service” on ground of Limitation State Charges Gog Jafrabad Port vs C.C.E. & S.T. CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1507
The Ahmedabad bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the service tax demand on waterfront royalty charges by considering it included in the ‘Port Service’.
The two-member bench comprising Ramesh Nair (Judicial) and C L Mahar (Technical) quashed the service tax demand on the grounds of limitation.
Service order by Affixing on factory gate as first option is Illegal as per Section 37 C (1) of Central Excise Act: CESTAT Navkar Agro Industries Ltd vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Ahmedabad-iii CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1508
The Ahmedabad bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the service of the order by pasting on the factory gate as the first option is not proper and legal as per section 37 C (1) of the Central Excise Act,1944.
The two-member bench comprising Ramesh Nair (Judicial) and C L Mahar (Technical) held that the service of the order by passing on the factory gate is not proper and legal and liable to be deleted.
Clearance of Chassis either on Physical exports out of country or to supply to EOU are Eligible for Excise Duty Exemption: CESTAT Quashes Excise Duty demand in favour of Ashok Leyland Ashok Leyland Limited vs Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1509
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the clearance of chassis either on physical exports out of the country or to supply to Export Oriented Unit (EOU) is eligible for excise duty exemption.
The two-member bench comprising Sulekha Beevi (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) held that the assessee was eligible for the excise duty exemption and the CENVAT credit was rightly availed by the assessee.
CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand on works contract involving supply of material under ‘Supply of Manpower Service’ on ground of Violation of Section 68 of Finance Act M/s UP Bridge Corporation vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1510
The Allahabad bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the service tax demand on the works contract involving the supply of materials under ‘supply of manpower services’ on the ground of violation of section 68 of the Finance Act,1994.
The two-member bench comprising P K Choudhary (Judicial) and Sanjiv Srivastava (Technical) quashed the service tax demand against the assessee while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
No Demurrage charges Includable in Custom valuation of imported goods for purpose of charging Customs duty: CESTAT Sanghi Industries Ltd vs C.C.-Kandla CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1512
The Ahmedabad bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that demurrage charges were not includable in the custom valuation of imported goods to charge customs duty.
The two-member bench comprising Ramesh Nair (Judicial) and Raju (Technical) quashed the demand raised by the revenue while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
No Retrospective Effect of Two Two-year Time Period on Export Obligation Extension as EPCG Committee has not Stated Any Period: CESTAT M/s.Ashok Leyland Limited vs The Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-IV CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1513
While considering a bunch of appeals, the Chennai Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the retrospective effect of two years does not apply to export obligation extension as the Export Promotion Capital Goods (EPCG) committee has not stated any period.
A two-member bench comprising of Ms Sulekha Beevi C S, Member (Judicial) and Mr Vasa Seshagiri Rao, Member (Technical) set aside the penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority on the supporting manufacturers viz. M/s.Renault Nissan, M/s.Gestamp Automotive Chennai, M/s.Myoung Shin India Automotive, M/s.Daejoo Automotive, M/s.Global India Automotive, M/s. Magna Automotive, M/s.Caparo Engineering India on the ground of installation of imported capital goods in other premises. The CESTAT remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority to consider the decisions passed by the Committees, the compliances made by the appellants and the fulfilment of export obligations and pass a fresh order preferably within 3 months.
Biscuits qualify as ‘Food Stuff’, eligible for Service Tax Refund: CESTAT M/s. Bansal Biscuits Private Limited vs Commr. of Central Excise & Service Tax, Patna CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1514
The Kolkata Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), observed that biscuits qualify as food stuff and hence are eligible for service tax refund.
A Two-Member Bench comprising R Muralidhar, Judicial Member and K Anpazhakan, Technical Member observed that “From the Order, it is clear that the only ground on which the refund claim has been rejected is on account of application of Section 11B i.e. time bar. The Commissioner (Appeals) has also upheld the OIO. Therefore, it has to be concluded that upto the OIA stage, the only ground on which the refund claim has been rejected is on account of Section 11B provisions. Therefore, there is no necessity for us to go into the aspect as to whether the biscuits can qualify as food stuff so as to be eligible for the exemption.”
Top Stories CESTAT quashes Service Tax Demand on ‘Management, Maintenance and Repair Services’ on ground of Limitation M/s. Orient Flight School vs The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1515
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the service tax demand on management, maintenance, and repair services on the grounds of limitation.
The two-member bench comprising Sulekha Beevi (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) deleted the demand raised under Management, Maintenance & Repair Services on the ground of limitation.
CENVAT credit of Excise Duty allowable to Warranty and AMC services provided by a common service provider as common input services for both manufacturing unit and corporate office: CESTAT M/s. Acer India Private Limited vs Commissioner of Central Excise CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1516
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the warranty and Annual Maintenance Contract (AMC) service provided by a common service provider as common input service for both manufacturing unit and corporate offices are entitled to CENVAT credit of excise duty.
The two-member bench comprising Sulekha Beevi (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) quashed the CENVAT credit demand while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
CESTAT Abates Service Tax Appeal as per Rule 22 of CESTAT Procedure Rules on ground of Non-filing of Application by Liquidator Bharat NRE Coke Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise, Belgaum CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1517
The Bangalore bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) abated the service tax appeal as per Rule 22 of CESTAT procedure rules,1982 on the grounds of non-filing of application by the liquidator.
A single-member bench comprising Pullela Nageswara Rao (Technical) held that where no application for continuance of the proceeding before this Tribunal was filed by the liquidator and the appeal abated as per Rule 22 of CESTAT Procedure Rules.
Relief to LG Electronics: CESTAT Allows Refund of SAD on Import of Goods on ground of Service Tax Exemption Eligibility LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd vs e Commissioner of Customs(Exports) CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1518
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) granted relief to LG Electronics by allowing a refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) on the import of goods on the grounds of service tax exemption eligibility.
The two-member bench comprising Sulekha Beevi (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) held that the rejection of the refund claim was not justified and allowed the appeal filed by the assessee.
Income from sale of Tender Forms, Xeroxing, Printing, Digital Software, Certificates not BAS: CESTAT quashes Service Tax Demand Andhra Pradesh Technology Services Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Tax Hyderabad CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1519
The Hyderabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed service tax demand and ruled that the income from sale of tender forms, xeroxing, printing, digital software, certificates not business auxiliary services (BAS).
A Two-Member Bench comprising Anil Choudhary, Judicial Member and AK Jyotishi, Technical Member observed that “A perusal of the said categorisation of services would clearly reveal that, the Appellant would only assist the Government Departments/Organisation for availing/procuring various IT related hardware/services, and for such assistance, they collect certain administrative charges. Therefore, the services of the Appellant do not satisfy the definition of ‘commission agent’ so as to bring them under the category of ‘Business Auxiliary Services’.” “Further, with respect to exemption claim rejected on income such as, sale of tender forms, xeroxing and printing and digital software and certificates, which are not covered under business auxiliary services. This claim was not allowed on the ground that the appellant had not produced any evidence in support of the claim. However, as can be seen, they are identified clearly in the Show Cause Notice itself, therefore, the denial of exemption is incorrect” the Bench concluded.
CESTAT Upholds Rejection of CENVAT Credit of Excise Duty Demand on Manufacture of Drugs on ground of Limitation CCE & ST-Chandigarh vs M/s Ind-Swift Laboratories CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1520
The Chandigarh bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) upheld the rejection of CENVAT credit of excise duty demand on the manufacture of drugs on the ground of limitation.
The two-member bench comprising S S Garg (Judicial) and Anjani Kumar (Technical) upheld the rejection of recovery of CENVAT credit availed by the assessee.
CENVAT Credit of Excise Duty allowable on Raw materials used for Manufacture of finished goods : CESTAT M/s.Kadri Wovens vs The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1521
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the CENVAT credit of excise duty is allowable on the raw materials used for the manufacture of finished goods.
The two-member bench comprising (Judicial) Sulekha Beevi and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) held that the assessee was eligible for the refund claim while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
Top Stories No Service Tax Leviable on Activity of Laying of pipelines provided to Government under ‘Works Contract Service’: CESTAT Indian Hume Pipe Co. Limited vs The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1522
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the service tax cannot be levied on the activity of laying pipelines provided to the Government under ‘Works Contract Service’.
The Bench observed that in the case of Lanco Infratech Ltd. Vs CC, the court held that the activity of laying of pipelines as stated in clause (b) of the definition of Works Contract Services as well as turnkey projects involving laying of the pipelines and other connected activities when provided to Government would be exempt from levy of service tax. The two-member bench comprising Sulekha Beevi (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) held that the laying of pipelines was outside the purview of levy of service tax, under works contract service.
Amount received for Renting of fit outs/movable properties would not fall under ‘Renting of immovable properties service’: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand M/s. Khivraj Techpark Private Limited vs Commissioner of Service Tax CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1523
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the amount received for renting fit-outs or movable properties would not fall under the category of renting immovable property services.
The two-member bench comprising Sulekha Beevi (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) quashed the demand raised by the revenue while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
No Interest liability arises on Merely availed CENVAT credit and reversed before utilizing for remittance of Excise duty: CESTAT M/s. Mobis India Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1524
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the interest liability cannot be raised on merely availed CENVAT credit and reversed before the utilization for remittance of excise duty.
The two-member bench comprising Sulekha Beevi (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) upheld the wrongly availed CENVAT credit demand and quashed the demand of recovery of interest on such ineligible CENVAT Credit by the assessee.
CESTAT Quashes Excise Duty Demand on Clearance of TOR Steels on ground of Absence of Corroborative Evidence M. J. Steel Re-Rolling Mill vs The Commissioner of Central Excise CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1525
The Bangalore bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed the excise duty demand on the clearance of TOR steel on the grounds of the absence of corroborative evidence.
The Bench observed that the revenue had not collected the details of raw material suppliers nor any attempt was made to investigate raw material suppliers from either questioning the partner. Also, not an iota of evidence was placed on record indicating clearance of the manufactured goods clandestinely by bringing on record the evidence of Transporters or the purchasers of finished goods. The two-member bench comprising D M Misra (Judicial) and Pullela Nageshwara Rao (Technical) quashed the excise duty demand imposed on the assessee while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
Relief to MRF: CESTAT allows Re-Credit of Cenvat Credit as Capital Goods are used In Manufacture of Final Products M/s. MRF Limited vs Commissioner of GST and Central Excise CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1526
The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) allowed re-credit of cenvat credit as capital goods are used in manufacture of final products, thereby granting relief to M/s. MRF Limited.
A Single Member Bench comprising Vasa Seshagiri Rao, Technical Member observed that “In view of the above, we have to hold that the appellant is eligible to retake the credit which was initially provisionally written off. The provisions of Rule 3(5B) of erstwhile Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 are very clear which states that when said inputs or capital goods are subsequently used in the manufacture of their products, the manufacturer is entitled to take the credit of the amount equivalent to the Cenvat Credit paid earlier.”
‘Vajra Vahan’ considered as specially constructed and fitted vehicle with enable to perform specified functions are Eligible for Excise Duty Exemption: CESTAT The Commissioner of Central Excise, Gurgaon-II vs M/s Metaltech Motor Bodies Pvt. Limited CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1527
The Chandigarh bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the vajra vahan which was considered as specially constructed and fitted vehicle enabled to perform specified functions was eligible for excise duty exemption.
The two-member bench comprising S S Garg (Judicial) and Anjani Kumar (Technical) held that the vajra vahan can be classified as a special vehicle used for specific functions.
No NCCD Leviable on Clearance of Excisable Goods to 100% EOU for captive consumption: CESTAT M/s. Komatsu India Pvt. Ltd vs The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (CESTAT) 1528
The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD) cannot be levied on the clearance of excisable goods to 100% Export Oriented Units (EOU) for captive consumption.
The two-member bench comprising Sulekha Beevi (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) held that the NCCD was not leviable in respect of goods cleared availing the benefit of Notification No.108/95-CE while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
