Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The CESTAT held that the services provided by the appellant did not qualify as Online Information Data and Access Retrieval (OIDAR) services. The appellant performed activities like copyediting, typesetting, formatting, proofreading, graphic designing, indexing, and coding on data provided by a foreign entity, without owning or transferring the data. As the appellant did not provide access or retrieval of owned data, the services did not fall under OIDAR. The appellant's services qualified as exports, entitling them to a refund u/r 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The appeal was allowed.
The CESTAT held that the services provided by the appellant did not qualify as Online Information Data and Access Retrieval (OIDAR) services. The appellant performed activities like copyediting, typesetting, formatting, proofreading, graphic designing, indexing, and coding on data provided by a foreign entity, without owning or transferring the data. As the appellant did not provide access or retrieval of owned data, the services did not fall under OIDAR. The appellant's services qualified as exports, entitling them to a refund u/r 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.