On Monday, 25 November 2013 6:54 PM, "info@cliofindia.com" <info@cliofindia.com> wrote:
www.cliofindia.com info@cliofindia.com
GOODS AND SERVICE TAX REPORTS (GSTR) HIGHLIGHTS
F Manufacture of excisable goods within meaning of section 2(f)(iii) of 1944 Act would have to be determined on basis of facts after issuance of show-cause notice and not on basis of affidavits in petition under article 226 of Constitution : Jost's Engineering Co. Ltd. v. Union of India (Bombay) P. 82
F Department to dispose of refund application within three months from date of its receipt : Claim for interest during pendency of appeal cannot be allowed : Abdulla Gani v. Union of India (Bombay) P. 85
F Department having accepted two bills of entry on same line of arguments had no logic in challenging order of Tribunal in respect of one bill of entry : Commissioner of Customs (Exports) v. Lalchand Bhimraj (Madras) P. 91
F Where show-cause notice not containing details whether scrap generated in course of manufacture of iron and steel and no proof of manufacture of iron and steel goods or components, assessee not liable to pay duty : Commissioner of Central Excise v. CESTAT (Madras) P. 96
F For applicability of rule 6, manufacture of dutiable goods and exempted goods were conditions precedent : Bagasse generated from crushing of sugarcane is neither manufactured goods nor final product, but is residue or waste : Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (Allahabad) P. 99
F Where immediate action of suspension of licence of CHA called for, Commissioner has to take swift action and cannot wait, if he does so suspension can be made only after full enquiry under regulation 22 of 2004 Regulations : Schankar Clearing and Forwarding v. Commissioner of Customs (Import and General) (Delhi) P. 114
F Acceptance of clearing of goods without verifying existence of declared importer by CHA, amounts to dereliction of duty and agent to be heard on existence of importer : Where delay of fourteen days taken for signing order of suspension indicative of no immediate urgency for suspension dispensing with requirement of regulation 22, orders set aside : Subrata Guhasarker v. Union of India (Calcutta) P. 120
F Where there was proof of CHA involved in filing fraudulent bills of entry and clearing unknown goods, order suspending licence not to be interfered with : Schankar Clearing and Forwarding v. Commissioner of Customs (Trib.-Delhi) P. 111
F Where valuation of goods as taken by Commissioner (Appeals) reflected only the base price or factory price without providing amount of value added tax paid, matter remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding matter afresh after verifying facts : Commissioner of Customs (Port) v. Mullamadakkal Mammutty (Trib.-Kolkata) P. 125
F Where reversal of credit done prior to issuance of show-cause notice and no finding by authorities below whether bills of entry mentioned in show-cause notice genuine or fake, matter remanded for fresh enquiry : Tripala Wirelinks Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise (Trib.-Delhi) P. 130
F Where assessee filing returns regularly indicating total amount of credit availed and under bona fide belief that credit of service tax paid by service provider on input services was available to it, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked : Commissioner of Central Excise v. ITC Ltd. (Trib.-Kolkata) P. 133
F Whether product generally not bought or sold or had no demand in market, irrelevant for determination of marketability : Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise (Trib.-Kolkata) P. 138
F Manufactured goods put to use at place of manufacture can be said to have been removed from place of manufacture and covered under Explanation II to rule 4 of 2002 Rules, as in force at material time : Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise (Trib.-Kolkata) P. 138
F Assessee assembling and putting product to use without any external training or help which fact was suppressed from knowledge of Department and no excise duty was paid, invocation of extended period of limitation and imposition of penalty proper : Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise (Trib.-Kolkata) P. 138
F Where period involved was prior to amendment of rule 14 of 2004 Rules, assessee was liable to pay interest from date of erroneous taking of credit to its reversal in accordance with decision of Supreme Court : Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise v. Ultratech Cements Ltd. (Trib.-Bangalore) P. 155
F Cenvat credit taken on valid documents and inputs duly used in, or in relation to manufacture of final products, no reason to deny credit to assessee : Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise v. Ultratech Cements Ltd. (Trib.-Bangalore) P. 155
To Unsubscribe : Reply back with "Unsubscribe" in subject followed by the key word "ITR" or "CC" or "VST" or "CCD" or "GSTR" or "ITR (Trib)", respectively or "All" if you do not want any Email. ITR : Income Tax Reports, CC : Company Cases, VST : VAT and Service Tax Cases, CCD : Consolidated Commercial Digest, GSTR : Goods and Service Tax Reports, ITR (Trib) : ITR'S Tribunal Tax Reports. Also send your feedback or comments to info@cliofindia.com
COMPANY LAW INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT. LTD.
No. 2, Vaithyaram Street,
T.Nagar, Chennai - 600017.
Phone: (044) 24350752 - 55
Fax: (044) 24322015
info@cliofindia.com
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment