I-T - Only thing in a Judge's decision binding a party is the principle upon which matter is decided; it is important to analyze a decision & isolate from it ratio decidendi : ITAT

I-T- For the lack of specific finding by the AO as to whether the deposits during demonetization period were in old currency or new currency, benefit of doubt could be given to the assessee : ITAT

I-T - Principles of consistency need to be adopted, if there is no change in facts as well as law with respect to issue raised by assessee: ITAT

I-T- Assessee should file a fresh rectification application if the assesee is aggrieved for non-granting of TDS credit : ITAT

I-T- Any payment of interest to any partner which is authorised by, and is in accordance with, the terms of the partnership deed and relates to any period falling after date of such partnership deed shallnot be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head profits and gains of business or profession : ITAT

CX - Both authorities have gone beyond scope of SCN, holding that appellant is not entitled to take cenvat credit on transit insurance, which was not any issue in SCN, appellant is entitled to take cenvat credit:CESTAT

Cus - There is complete violation of principles of natural justice by not supplying copies of relevant RUD as well as not allowing cross examination of witnesses, demand cannot sustain:CESTAT

2023-TIOL-335-CESTAT-KOL

CCGST & Excise Vs Broad Son Commodities Pvt Ltd

ST - Government of Bihar awarded to assessee the right to use mining of minerals, oil or gas in respect of sand ghats of Patna, Bhojpur and Saran of State of Bihar - The right to use of natural resources (Sand) was assigned for period 2015 to 2019 on 29.12.2014 - As per settlement agreement, amount have fixed for the year 2015 and 20% increase was fixed in respect of subsequent year 2016-2019 - The fixed percentage of settlement amount was so fixed must be remitted at prescribed dates - The two installments of settlement amount of 2017, were payable on 15th December, 2016 and 15th April, 2017 i.e. after 2016 - Revenue was of the view that right to use natural resources for period 2017 were not assigned before 01.04.2016, therefore, sought to deny the benefit of Mega exemption Notification Sl.No.61 - Therefore, proceedings were initiated against assessee by issuance of SCN - On examination of said Notfn, right to use assigned by Government or local authority before 1st April, 2016, is entitled for exemption from payment of service tax - Admittedly, right to use of natural resources (Sand) were assigned on 29.12.2014, which has no concern with terms of payment - No infirmity found in impugned order, same is upheld: CESTAT

- Appeal dismissed: KOLKATA CESTAT

2023-TIOL-334-CESTAT-KOL

India Potteries Ltd Vs CCGST & Excise

CX - Appellant is in appeal against impugned order wherein it has been held that they are not entitled to take cenvat credit on transit insurance paid by them - Although appellant obtained for SVLDRS Scheme, 2019, but no Form of SVLDRS 4, has been issued till yet - Therefore, appellant has opted out of SVLDRS, 2019 - On merits, in SCN, only demand of interest has been raised against appellant for intervening period and penalty proposed to be imposed under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, whereas adjudicating authority and Commissioner (A) have gone beyond the scope of SCN while holding that appellant is not entitled to take cenvat credit on transit insurance, which was not any issue in SCN - Therefore, both the authorities below have gone beyond the scope of SCN - As adjudicating authority has held that appellant is not entitled to take cenvat credit on transit insurance during impugned period which is against the law laid down by Apex Court in case of Andhra Sugars Ltd. 2018-TIOL-45-SC-CX , appellant is entitled to take cenvat credit on transit insurance - Appellant is not liable to pay interest and no penalty is imposable under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - SCN issued to appellant is void and accordingly, impugned order is set aside: CESTAT

- Appeal allowed: KOLKATA CESTAT

2023-TIOL-333-CESTAT-MAD

Pravin Tex Vs CC

Cus - Assessee is in appeal against impugned order, whereby original authority held that in view of manipulation on quadruplicate copies, the exports effected vide shipping bills cannot be counted towards fulfilment of export obligation under 4 EPCG licences and that assessee is liable to pay duty along with interest and penalty - The main contention raised by assessee is that they have not been supplied with copy of 162 shipping bills which is alleged to have been manipulated by them - Undisputedly, only copies of 8 originals and 4 duplicate shipping bills have been supplied to assessee - Though it is alleged that all 162 shipping bills were manipulated and entire duty forgone has been confirmed, department has not been able to furnish these documents to assessee - Further evidence relied by department are statements of few third party exporters - Though assessee requested for cross examination of these witnesses, department has not acceded to the request - There is complete violation of principles of natural justice by not supplying copies of relevant RUD as well as not allowing cross examination of witnesses even after request made by assessee - Department cannot confirm demand on the basis of assumption and presumptions - The allegations raised in SCN have to be established by evidence - The noticee has a right to get the copies of documents - Department has to record reasons for denying the request for cross examination - The cross examination cannot be denied stating that no purpose will be achieved - The department has not been to establish allegations raised in SCN and further there is blatant violation of principles of natural justice - Demand cannot sustain and is set aside: CESTAT

- Appeals allowed: CHENNAI CESTAT