I-T - Once dispute between assessees and Revenue in matter of taxability of amount received from sale of land stands settled under Vivad- se-Viswas Scheme, nothing further remains to be decided: ITAT

I-T - AO cannot unilaterally made addition u/s 68 only on basis of statement provided by third party without any iota of evidences discrediting evidences furnished by assessee: ITAT

I-T - No mala fides could be attributed to assessee so as to invoke penalty proceedings u/s 271FA, if breach was only technical and could have flown from bonafide ignorance of assessee: ITAT

I-T - When AO decide to issue SCN, then limitation would begin to run from date of letter of AD recommending 'initiation' of penalty proceedings: ITAT

I-T - Activity of cooperative society for supply of sugarcane to sugar mill constitute marketing activity of sugarcane and fulfills essential requirement for claiming deduction u/s 80P(2)(iii): ITAT

ST - Sale and manufacture are directed inter-related and commission paid on sales needs to be accounted for as services related to sales promotion: CESTAT

2023-TIOL-136-CESTAT-MAD

Mittal Ispat Ltd Vs CGST & CE

CX - Appellants have sought for benefit of SVLDR Scheme and matter has been settled as per the scheme - Consequently, appeals filed by Department against impugned orders challenging the decision of lower authority directing to give cum duty benefit becomes infructuous: CESTAT

- Revenue's appeals dismissed: CHENNAI CESTAT

2023-TIOL-135-CESTAT-DEL

Pr.CC Vs K P Impex

Cus - Issue involved in appeal filed by revenue is, whether Commissioner (A) was justified in reducing quantum of redemption fine and penalty - Revenue is in appeal on the ground that importer had prayed for a decision on merits and had agreed to pay fine and penalty as may be imposed - Further, immediately on passing of O-I-O, importer deposited the fine and penalty imposed, vide TR-6 challan and, thereafter re-exported the goods, it is further urged by revenue that importer deposited the fine and penalty without lodging any letter of protest and thereafter, have filed the appeal before Commissioner (A) - There is no merit in grounds of appeal raised by revenue, as there can be no estoppel against law - Appellant have exercised their statutory right of appeal which is not liquidated, as they have submitted at adjudication stage they are ready to pay fine and penalty: CESTAT

- Appeal dismissed: DELHI CESTAT

2023-TIOL-134-CESTAT-KOL

Moulded Fibreglass Products Vs CCGST & CX

ST - Instant case arbitrates around admissibility of input service credit on sales commission paid to various agents - During 01.04.11 to 31.03.2015, appellant had taken CENVAT Credit of input service on sales commission paid to different agents - Department referred to Cadila judgement to confirm demand, as sales commission is not covered in inclusive part of definition of Input Service - Explanation inserted vide Notification No. 2/2016-C.E. (N.T.) was issued for explaining clause 'sales Promotion' in context of rule 2(l) of CCR, 20004 - It provided an additional support to 'Sales Promotion' to make it meaningful and purposeful - Department had intention to allow credit on sales commission and circular No. 943/4/2011-CX is binding on departmental officers read with Notification No. 2/2016-C.E. (N.T.) - Sales commission is directly attributable to sales of products - Any activity which amounts to sale of products is deemed to be sales promotion activity in normal trade parlance - The commission paid on sales of products/services with an intention to boost the sales of Company - The commission paid on sales becomes part of sales promotion resulting in increased manufacturing activity - The sales commission has a direct nexus with sales, which in turn is related to manufacture of products - If there is no sale, there would not be any need to manufacture the productsn - Be that so as it may, to increase manufacturing activity an encouragement is being given by way of sales commission for achieving increased sales - High Court of Punjab & Haryana in case of Ambika Overseas 2011-TIOL-951-HC-P&H-ST , had clearly held that sale and manufacture are directed inter-related and commission paid on sales needs to be accounted for as services related to sales promotion - In case of Essar Steel India Ltd. , Tribunal have held that "Explanation" inserted in Rule 2(l) of CCR, 2004 vide Notification No. 2/2016-C.E. (N.T.) is declaratory in nature and is applicable retrospectively - Impugned order cannot be sustained and is, therefore, set aside: CESTAT

- Appeal allowed: KOLKATA CESTAT