Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that for the period prior to 01.04.2011, no reversal of CENVAT Credit was required for input services used partially in trading activities. The Appellant had already voluntarily reversed Rs. 22,534/- with interest for trading-related credits. The tribunal found the department failed to establish credit inadmissibility, and thus set aside the original order denying CENVAT Credit, interest, and penalty. The decision affirmed the Appellant's right to claim input service credits across manufacturing and trading operations during the specified period.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that for the period prior to 01.04.2011, no reversal of CENVAT Credit was required for input services used partially in trading activities. The Appellant had already voluntarily reversed Rs. 22,534/- with interest for trading-related credits. The tribunal found the department failed to establish credit inadmissibility, and thus set aside the original order denying CENVAT Credit, interest, and penalty. The decision affirmed the Appellant's right to claim input service credits across manufacturing and trading operations during the specified period.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.