Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The CESTAT held that the extended period of limitation invoked for levying service tax was unsustainable as there was no wilful suppression of facts by the appellant. The demands of Rs.1,01,6,502/- under 'sponsorship' services, Rs.13,30,558/- on inter-company expenses, and Rs.20,371/- as interest were set aside. For renting services, the demand of Rs.2,45,58,483/- was set aside, and the appellant was directed to produce evidence for the remaining Rs.34,29,130/-. The demands of Rs.73,00,732/- for import of services and Rs.2,80,40,921/- for software licenses were remanded for de-novo adjudication to determine the appellant's role and liabilities. The penalties were also set aside. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
The CESTAT held that the extended period of limitation invoked for levying service tax was unsustainable as there was no wilful suppression of facts by the appellant. The demands of Rs.1,01,6,502/- under 'sponsorship' services, Rs.13,30,558/- on inter-company expenses, and Rs.20,371/- as interest were set aside. For renting services, the demand of Rs.2,45,58,483/- was set aside, and the appellant was directed to produce evidence for the remaining Rs.34,29,130/-. The demands of Rs.73,00,732/- for import of services and Rs.2,80,40,921/- for software licenses were remanded for de-novo adjudication to determine the appellant's role and liabilities. The penalties were also set aside. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.