Panchnama Not To Be Treated As Certificate Required For Admitting Printouts From Personal Computer As Evidence: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that a panchnama cannot be treated as a certificate required under Section 36B(4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for admitting printouts from a personal computer as evidence. The Bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Hemambika R. Priya (Technical Member) has observed that “the CPU did not contain the hard disk. The hard disk was in fact picked up from the corner of the room. No ...

Extended Period Of Limitation Can't Be Invoked If Officials Are Negligent: CESTAT

The Kolkata Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that no further investigation was conducted by the Revenue for more than two years after the search, hence the extended period of limitation can't be invoked. The Bench of R. Muralidhar (Judicial Member) and Rajeev Tandon (Technical Member) has observed that “the officials did not take up the further investigation properly and were shoddy at their best. No statements were recorded from the...

Assessee Failed To Explain Huge Variation In Stock And Admitted To Shortage: CESTAT Upholds Penalty Under Section 11 AC(1)(A) Of The Central Excise Act, 1944

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that the assessee has failed to explain the huge variation in stock and has admitted to the shortage, making them liable under Section 11AC(1)(A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Section 11 AC(1)(A) Of the Central Excise Act, 1944 provides that if any excise duty has not been levied, paid, short-levied, short-paid, or erroneously refunded due to fraud, collusion, willful misstatement,...

No Service Tax Can Be Determined Without Clarifying The Category Of Service Under Which The Said Amount Can Be Attributed: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that no service tax can be determined without clarifying the category of service under which the said amount can be attributed. Under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, if service tax has not been levied, paid, short-levied, short-paid, or erroneously refunded due to fraud, collusion, willful misstatement, suppression of facts, or contravention with the intent to evade payment, the person...

No Evidence Of Over-Valuation Of Goods; Transaction Value Wrongly Rejected Under Rule 8 of Customs Valuation Rules: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has stated that there is no evidence of over-valuation of Goods and the transaction value has been wrongly rejected under Rule 8 of Customs Valuation Rules. Section 113 of the Customs Act, 1952 provides the list of goods that are liable to be confiscation if they are attempted to be improperly exported. Section 113 (a) of the Customs Act, 1952 provides that the goods are liable for confiscation if...

No Element Of Misstatement And Intention To Evade Payment Of Service Tax: Gauhati High Court Quashes Demand & Penalty

Finding that the Assessee company had provided every detail regarding availment of CENVAT Credit in the ST-3 Returns, and the same was considered by the Central Excise Commissioner, the Gauhati High Court held that the fact of wilful misstatement or suppression should specifically be mentioned in the show-cause notice. Since the Department had not misstated any fact with intent to evade the payment of service tax, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice Suman...

CESTAT Weekly Round-Up: 18 To 24 August 2024

SEZ Unit In India Is A Territory Deemed To Be Outside India, No Excise Duty Payable On Manufacturing Goods: CESTATCase Title: Commissioner Appeals – CGST & Central Excise Rajkot Versus M/S. Reliance Industries Ltd, Unit Of RSEZ JamnagarThe Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)has held that the SEZ Act exempts all duties in respect of the goods manufactured in the Special Economic Zones (SEZ).Import Of Floodlight For World Cup On Duty Exemption, SCN...

Incorrect Address Mentioned In Invoices Can't Be A Reason To Deny Cenvat Credit: CESTAT

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that an incorrect address mentioned in invoices cannot be a reason to deny CENVAT credit.The bench of Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) has observed that the invoices with incorrect addresses issued by the input service providers contain all the requisite particulars as required under the proviso to Rule 9(2); therefore, Cenvat credit cannot be denied to the appellant. In fact, Rule 9(2) nowhere requires...

Tax Invoice, E-Way Bill, GR Or Payment Details Not Sufficient To Prove Physical Movement Of Goods: Allahabad High Court Upholds Penalty U/S 74 GST

Recently, the Allahabad High Court has held that production of tax invoice, e-way bill, GR or payment details is not sufficient to show the actual physical movement of the transaction for the purposes of availing Input Tax Credit under Section 16 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. Section 16 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 provides for the conditions and eligibility for claiming input tax credit. Section 16(2) provides that an assesee is not entitled any input tax credit...

Imposing Redemption Fine Equal To Value Of Goods Is Harsh; CESTAT Directs Reduction

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), while reducing the quantum of the redemption fine, held that imposing a redemption fine equal to the value of goods is harsh.The bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P. V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that the total unbranded goods were valued at Rs. 1,65,49,893/-, and a redemption fine of the same value was imposed by the Commissioner in the impugned order. He also confiscated 2880 pairs of...

Preferential Location Charges Charged By Builder Includible In Taxable Value For Service Tax Levy: CESTAT

The Allahabad Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the preferential location charges charged by the builder includible in the taxable value of the service tax levy.The bench of P.K. Choudhary (Judicial Member) and Sanjiv Srivastava (Technical Member) have observed that the service is rendered in the context of a location, which does not make it a tax on land within the meaning of Entry 49 of List II. The tax continues to be a tax on the rendering of...

Dept. To Wait For Outcome Of DRI Investigation Before Rejecting Request For Correction Of Declared Value In Bill Of Entry: CESTAT

The Banglore Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the department would have awaited the outcome of the DRI investigation before rejecting the request for correction of the declared value in the bill of entry.The bench of P.A. Augustian (Judicial Member) and Pullela Nageswara Rao (Technical Member) have observed that, though there was considerable delay in seeking amendment of the bill of entries, since the goods were cleared provisionally, records...