Vessel Engaged Under SEAIOCM Agreement Qualifies As 'Foreign Going Vessel' For Exemption U/S 87 Of Customs Act: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court stated that vessel engaged under SEAIOCM agreement qualified as 'foreign going vessel' for exemption under section 87 Of Customs Act. The Bench consists of Justices A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and P.M. Manoj was addressing the issue of whether in the backdrop of the terms of engagement of the vessel under the SEAIOCM Agreement, the vessel can be categorized as a foreign going vessel for the purposes of claiming exemption under Section 87 of the Customs Act. In ...

Import Of Inverter Component Without Photo-Voltaic Cell Not Eligible For Customs Duty Exemption: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court stated that import of inverter component without photo-voltaic cell not eligible for customs duty exemption. “Inasmuch as the import was only of the inverter component, without the photo-voltaic cell - a component that was essential for harnessing solar energy, which could then be routed through the inverter system for the supply of electrical energy to the grid, the assessee cannot be seen as eligible for the benefit of the exemption notification……” stated the...

Actual Figures Can Be Considered To Determine Service Tax Payable By Assessee If Books Of Accounts Show Higher Figures Than Statutory Returns: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that actual figures can be considered for determining service tax payable by assessee if books of accounts show higher figures than statutory returns. The Bench of Justices Binu Tamta (Judicial) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical) has observed that, “If the books of accounts show higher figures than the statutory returns the actual figures can be considered for determining the service tax payable...

No Exporter Has Obligation To Either Anticipate Or Conform To Views Of DRI In Classifying Goods In Shipping Bills: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that no exporter has an obligation to either anticipate or to conform to views of DRI in classifying goods in shipping bills. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical) has observed that, “no exporter has any obligation to anticipate any views of DRI, audit or preventive officers regarding the classification of the goods or to conform to them. The exporter...

Circular Clarifying Previous Notifications On Fiscal Duty Has Retrospective Effect : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently held that a circular/notification issued by the revenue department, clarifying or explaining a fiscal regulation, has to be given retrospective effect.In the facts of the case at hand, the Court held that a Circular dated 17.09.2010 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) had to be given retrospective effect as it clarified certain previous notifications on customs duty.It was opined that, being explanatory in nature, the Circular could not be...

S.27 Customs Act Or Doctrine Of Unjust Enrichment Won't Apply To Refund Of Bank Guarantee : Supreme Court Allows Patanjali Plea

The Supreme Court has held that Section 27 of the Customs Act, which requires a person seeking refund of duty to show that the burden was not passed on to the customer, is not applicable when refund is sought of a wrongly invoked bank guarantee.This is because encashment of bank guarantees by the Customs Department cannot be treated as payment of customs duty. Hence, neither Section 27 nor the doctrine of unjust enrichment is applicable. Holding so, the Supreme Court allowed the...

Admissibility Of Printouts From Seized Electronic Evidence Requires Certificate U/S 36B Of Central Excise Act: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that admissibility of printouts from seized electronic evidence requires certificate under Section 36B of the Central Excise Act. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical) has observed that, “that a printout generated from a secondary electronic evidence that has been seized, cannot be admitted in evidence unless the statutory conditions laid down in section...

Excise Duty Under Sugar Cess Act Can Be Claimed As CENVAT Credit: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court stated that excise duty under sugar tax act can be claimed as CENVAT credit. The Bench consists of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) was addressing the issue of whether payment of duty under Sugar Cess Act, 1982 can be claimed as Cenvat Credit when the Cenvat Credit Rules does not provide payment of cess under the Sugar Cess Act, 1982 as not being eligible under Rule 3 of the said Rules. In this case, the adjudicating...

12% IGST Is Leviable On Imported 'Lemoneez' Drink: CESTAT

The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that 12% IGST is leviable on imported 'Lemoneez'. The Bench of Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) and K. Anpazhakan (Technical Member) was addressing the issue of whether 'Lemoneez' is appropriately classifiable under residuary item 2106 90 19 as a soft drink concentrate [under miscellaneous edible preparations, not elsewhere specified], or under Tariff Item 2009 31 00 (juice of a single citrus...

Penalty Can't Be Imposed U/S 114AA Of Customs Act On Broker Merely For Failing To Physically Verify Importer's Premises: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that penalty can't be imposed under Section 114AA Customs Act on customs broker merely for failing to physically verify the importer's premises. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) has observed that “the allegations that the appellant did not physically verify the premises of the importer, are not sufficient to fasten the appellant with the...

Consultancy Services Rendered To Foreign University/Foreign Group Entity Are Not “Intermediary Services”; Service Tax Not Leviable: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the consultancy services rendered by the assessee to the foreign university/foreign group entity do not fall under the category of “intermediary services” and the assessee are eligible for the benefit of “export of services”. The Bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) and (Technical Member) has observed that “it may also be appreciated that the final decision of admitting a student is...

Disputed Amount Paid Under Protest Much After Clearance Of Goods Is Not Covered Under Unjust Enrichment: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that disputed amount paid under protest much after clearance of goods is not covered by unjust enrichment. The Bench of Binu Tamta (Judicial Member) has observed that “once the supplies have already been made, any amount paid thereafter, as tax or deposit, the burden of such amount cannot be passed on to the assessee and, therefore, the test of unjust enrichment is not applicable.” In ...