Non-applicability of taxable services in PCE-Paper 5: Taxation, IPCE-Paper 4: Taxation and Final-Paper 8: Indirect Tax Laws for November, 2012 examinations. - (07-09-2012)
http://220.227.161.86/27842bos17427.pdf

Summary of DT Additional Case Laws for Nov2011

Summary of DT Additional Case Laws for Nov2011

Summary of IDT Additional Case Laws for Nov2011

Summary of IDT Additional Case Laws for Nov2011

Recent Case Laws IDT - UOI v. Ind-Swift Laboratories Ltd. 2011 (SC)

UOI v. Ind-Swift Laboratories Ltd. 2011 (SC)

It is clear & unambiguous that interest ON IRREGULAR CREDIT under Rule 14 of CCR, 2004 is payable when CENVAT Credit is

1. Taken wrongly, OR

2. Utilized wrongly, OR

3. Erroneously refunded

Recent Case Laws IDT - Usha Rectifiers Corpn. (I) Ltd. v. CCEx., New Delhi 2011 (SC)

Usha Rectifiers Corpn. (I) Ltd. v. CCEx., New Delhi 2011 (SC)

Assembling of TESTING EQUIPMENTS, shown as addition in P&M in Balance Sheet & Substantiated in Director's Report, to avoid importing to save foreign exchange, confirmed that such equipments were saleable & marketable, hence liable for Excise Duty.

Recent Case Laws - Excise - Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. CCE & C., Daman 2011 (SC)

Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. CCE & C., Daman 2011 (SC)

Prohibition on sale of physician samples under Drug Act did not have any bearing or effect on levy of Excise Duty as both the act operates separately. Hence, physician samples were excisable & liable to Excise Duty.

Recent Case Laws - Excise - Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. v. CCEx., Mumbai 2010 (SC)

Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. v. CCEx., Mumbai 2010 (SC)

Short Shelf-life of any product could not be equated with no shelf-life for the purpose of marketability test. Product with shelf-life of 2 to 3 days was marketable & hence excisable.

IDT Recent Case Laws - CCus. (Prev.), Mumbai v. M. Ambalal & Co. 2010 (SC)

CCus. (Prev.), Mumbai v. M. Ambalal & Co. 2010 (SC)

SMUGGLED GOODS could not be considered as IMPORTED GOODS for the purpose of benefit of the exemption notification. Two Separate definitions of S-Goods & I-Goods in Customs Act.

IDT Recent Case Laws - CCus. Chennai v. BPL Ltd. 2010 (Mad.)

CCus. Chennai v. BPL Ltd. 2010 (Mad.)

The Certificate, from a CA, of not passing the incidence of duty paid, is merely a piece of evidence acknowledging certain facts only & NOT A SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE for claiming refund u/s 27 of Customs Act.