Goods & Services Tax
Service Tax Case Laws

Search ST Case Laws





Appeal No.

Date of Order

Date of Order



Login/Subscribe to get access. Plan starts from Rs. 3500/-  Subscribe Now

Court: CESTAT Mumbai Date of Order: 2019-03-01

Learned AR objected the petition on the g round that the COD application s do not reflect the number of days required to be condoned for admission of appeal and there is a reference in the COD application that the concerned person had forgotten to follow up the case with the advocate that occasion ed the delay and he leave it to the discretion of the court for acceptance of appeal which is filed at a belated stage and the penalty amount is below Rs. 2 lakhs which provides a right to appeal to the aggrieved party. Printed by BoltPDF (c) NCH Software. Free for non-commercial use only.

Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-02-28

In view of the facts stated above, there appears to be reasonable cause for delay. Accordingly, the delay is condoned in filing the appeal. The hearing in the matter is fixed on 29 April, 2019. A copy of this order be served through the office of Commissioner.

  Court: CESTAT Chandigarh   Date of Order: 2019-02-26  

Ld.Counsel for the appellants made statement at the bar that he has made several telephone calls to the office through the said telephone number provided in the notice of hearing that the hearing notice has become infructuous as the appeal has already been decided. Despite that, the Commissioner (Appeals) passed the order dt.3.8.2018 recording that no communication has been received from the appellant for the date fixed for 16.7.2018 and decided the appeal against the appellant. Against that order also, the appellant has filed appeal before this Tribunal. In these circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals) is directed to appear before this Tribunal on 10.04.20219 to appraise the position why communication of Email had not been put before the Commissioner (Appeals) for appropriate action and what action has been taken against erring official for the said act. 

Court: CESTAT Kolkata Date of Order: 2019-02-25

In view of the facts as stated above and under the circumstances of the case, we fix the date of hearing of the matter on 28.03.2019 as requested by the Spl.

Court: CESTAT Ahmedabad   Date of Order: 2019-02-25

Shri S. Suriyanarayanan, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant did not dispute the demand of duty. He submits that since the duty was paid before issue of show cause notice, the penalty may be waived.

Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-02-21

Per-contra, it is submitted on behalf of the Department that no such understanding arrived on 11.05.2018, the date of hearing prior to the impugned order, as is mentioned in para 1 of the application. Impressing upon that there is no inadvertence, as alleged, application is prayed to be dismissed.

Court: CESTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2019-02-20

The substantial question of law, which has been raised in these appeals, is as to whether the show cause notices issued by the Department of Revenue Intelligence are valid and as to whether the Authority is vested with the jurisdiction to issue the show cause notices under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. 

Court: CESTAT Ahmedabad Date of Order: 2019-02-20

Shri. T.K. Sikdar, Ld. Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. He further submits that in Jammu and Kashmir the appellant are availing exemption Notification No.56/2002 according to which as per Rule 3 (4) it is clearly provided that in case of availment of Notification No. 56/2002-CE the Cenvat Credit can be utilized only for payment of duty of final product in respect of which exemption under the said respective Notification is availed of. In the present case the credit so taken in kadi Unit and the same was utilized for the goods on which the Notification No. 56/2002-CE was not availed, therefore, credit on advertisement service attributed to J&K Unit is not admissible to their Kadi Unit.

Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-02-18

The Ld. AR stated that delay is not properly explained. Having considered the rival contentions I deem it fit and proper to condone the delay subject to payment of cost of Rs. 2000/- in Prime Minister Relief Fund. Put up for hearing subject to payment of cost on 3rd April, 2019.

Court: CESTAT Bangalore Date of Order: 2019-02-15

Since the issue involved in all the three appeals is identical, therefore, all the three appeals are being taken up together for disposal. The details of all the three appeals are given herein below:Appeal No.Period Amount Penalty u/r 15(1) of CCR E/21071/2018 May 2008 Rs.4,62,909/-Rs.4,62,909/-E/21072/2018 April 2009 to September 2009 Rs.1,65,621/-Rs.1,65,621/-E/21073/2018 January to March 2009 Rs.1,93,639/- Rs.1,93,639/-