| SERVICE TAX 2020-TIOL-111-CESTAT-DEL
Chokhi Dhani Vs Pr.CCE & ST
ST - It is the contention of the Department that the appellant while providing the service of Mandap Keeper were also providing catering services to the persons/companies availing the facility of the Mandap Keeper Service, however, with an intention to avoid the ST, they have been splitting the value of service into two parts; one part with invoices raised for banquet hall charges and another for catering/food charges - SCN issued - demand confirmed, equivalent penalty imposed - on appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal, hence appellant is before the CESTAT.
Held: Matter is no longer res-integra as the issue has already been decided in appellant's favour in their own case vide final order No.58729-58730 of 2017 dated 15.12.2017 - following the above decision of this Tribunal, it is held that the impugned order-in-appeal is without any merit - the same is set aside and the appeal is allowed: CESTAT [para 4, 5]
- Appeal allowed: DELHI CESTAT
CENTRAL EXCISE
2020-TIOL-113-CESTAT-AHM
Veena Industries Ltd Vs CCE & ST
CX - Appellant, engaged in the manufacture of DG set, are raising debit notes of the quantity of diesel used during installation, commissioning and testing of the DG set at site of the customer - the case of the department is that this is a pre-delivery inspection charges and the same is includible in the transaction value - accordingly, the demand of CE duty was raised and confirmed - appeal to CESTAT.
Held: Appellant has discharged the excise duty on sale price of DG set - the activity of testing of DG set at the site of the customer and the use of diesel is not part and parcel of sale of DG set - it is an independent activity of service, therefore, the cost of diesel which was recovered by the appellant from the customer as reimbursement for the testing of the DG set is not includable in the transaction value towards the sale of DG set - the activity of filling of Diesel in the DG Set at the site Company is at most can be considered as pre-delivery inspection charges - on this issue, the Supreme Court in the case of TVS Motors Co. Ltd. held that the charges for pre-delivery inspection is not includable in the Assessable Value - it is also noted that on the activity of installation/commissioning, the appellant have paid the Service Tax, therefore, the said activity is altogether different from the sale of DG set - for these reasons also, the cost of diesel cannot be included in the Transaction Value charged for sale of DG set - in view of the above, the demand of duty is not sustainable - impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed : CESTAT [para 5, 6, 7]
- Appeal allowed: AHMEDABAD CESTAT
2020-TIOL-112-CESTAT-BANG
Bhuwalka Pipes Pvt Ltd Vs CCT & CE
CX - Dispute is whether the appellant is entitled to CENVAT credit of service tax paid on the rent for the premises leased for the purpose of back office as well as for the purpose of residential accommodation for its Managing Director and other officials who visit Bangalore on official work.
Held: Perusal of the rental agreement shows that the premises can be used for residential/guesthouse and back office purposes and the appellant have used the same for the official purpose only - inclusive clause in the definition of input service covers the impugned input service - appeal allowed with consequential relief: CESTAT [para 6, 7]
- Appeal allowed: BANGALORE CESTAT
CUSTOMS
2020-TIOL-110-CESTAT-MUM
Ayaz Ahmed Ansari Vs CC
Cus - Alleged failure of the appellant to produce the customs attested copies of the packing list is not a significant pointer as the goods claimed to have been imported in 2006 were subject to verification after a gap of eight years - It is more pertinent that the verification of the report of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence should have been able to establish the conformity of the imported goods with the description in the three bills of entry referred to in the show cause notice - conclusion of manipulation, or deliberate attempt to conceal the origin of the seized goods, is not established by the facts on record - impugned order set aside and appeal allowed: CESTAT [para 7 to 9]
- Appeal allowed : MUMBAI CESTAT | 
