Export obligation removed by notification, customs duty demand invalidated; penalties under s.112 and s.114AA quashed due to inadmissible s.108 statem...
Customs officers must wear and use department-issued body-worn cameras when clearing passenger baggage, with daily secure transfer and 30-day retentio...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10021 to 10040 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order insofar as it confirmed a Service Tax demand of Rs.2,05,90,153/-. The Tribunal found that the appellant acted as a "pure agent" in receiving reimbursements (stevedoring, freight, fender supply, spares, survey, launch hire, etc.) on an actual basis, as certified by the Chartered Accountant, and therefore such third-party disbursements are not includable in the assessable value under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 (prior to 14.05.2015). Because the tax demand was annulled, consequential interest and penalties could not be sustained. The impugned order is therefore set aside and the appeal is allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order insofar as it confirmed a Service Tax demand of Rs.2,05,90,153/-. The Tribunal found that the appellant acted as a "pure agent" in receiving reimbursements (stevedoring, freight, fender supply, spares, survey, launch hire, etc.) on an actual basis, as certified by the Chartered Accountant, and therefore such third-party disbursements are not includable in the assessable value under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 (prior to 14.05.2015). Because the tax demand was annulled, consequential interest and penalties could not be sustained. The impugned order is therefore set aside and the appeal is allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
