The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Kohler India Corporation Pvt. Ltd. remands matter where Commissioner erroneously applied Safari Retreats ratio under the CGST Act, without examining pari materia status of provisions under the Service tax provisions.
The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in Akshita Exports held that service tax cannot be levied on commission amounts merely shown in export invoices, when there is no contract or direct payment relationship between the Indian exporter and the alleged foreign service provider.
The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Utility Labour Suppliers held that demand of service tax cannot be raised when the tax liability has already been discharged under RCM.
The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Krish Corporation allowed the appeal and reduced the tax demand wherein the tax demand has been raised solely based on the statements of various witnesses during investigation without any evidence and further corroboration.
The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in the case of NJ India Invest Pvt. Ltd. allowed the appeal filed by setting aside the Service tax demand, thereby holding that incentives from AMCs for mutual fund distribution were exempt under reverse charge, advertisements in the ‘FUNDS WATCH’ magazine fell under print media exemption and training for sub-distributors was classified as exempt vocational training these all three are exempt from tax.
The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Vishal Tansukhbahai Gohel that in the case of outbound shipment, both by aircraft and vessel, the destination of goods shall be outside India. Therefore, there will be no Service tax on the freight margin recovered by the Appellant from the customer.
The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in the case of M/s. Inox India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise [Service Tax Appeal No.…
The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v.C.S.T.- Service Tax, Ahmedabad And Another [Service Tax Appeal No. 12716 of 2014…
The CESTAT, Ahmedabad in the case of M/s. Emtee Poly Yarn Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E. & S.T. VAPI allowed the appeal and set aside the demand, holding that the effective NIL rate of A.E.D. on the day of clearance would be applicable for the purpose of calculation of A.E.D.
The CESTAT, Ahmedabad has ruled that the assessee was aware of the chargeability of service tax upon the commission received under the head of Business Ancillary Services and had deliberately never disclosed the same in the monthly returns, thus the financial hardship faced by the assessee is no ground for non-payment of Service Tax, hence dismissed the appeal.
