Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract act 1872 Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat chennai Year: 2011 Page 1 of about 2 results (0.098 seconds)

Jun 27 2011 (TRI)

Commissioner of Customs (imports), Chennai Vs. Ravi Enterprises and Ot ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai

Decided on : Jun-27-2011

..... seas buyers. for recovery of the dues from the buyers, in respect of a sale executed on the basis of a high seas sale agreement/contract, the high seas sellers cannot coerce the customs authorities to release the seized goods to them particularly when both the seller and buyer are located ..... overseas by shri biren shah, when the fraud was detected. hence the officer is well within the provision of section 30 (3) of the customs act to reject the request for amendment, even if it had moved by the steamer agent ---. the adjudicating authority erred in not following the above legal position ..... the commissioner of customs (seaport-export), while deciding the issue of extension of seizure period for the impugned consignments under section110(a) of the customs act, 1962. ix) the adjudicating authority erred in not rejecting the contention of the high seas sellers that m/s.ravi enterprises and m/s.shree ..... the above legal position. v) the adjudicating authority erred in not appreciating the definition of the term importer given under section 2 (26) of customs act, 1962 in true spirit. section 2 (26) states that importer, in relation to any goods at any time between their importation and the time ..... of customs (seaport-exports) extended the period for issue of show cause notice in respect of seized goods under section 110 (2) of the customs act, 1962 by another six months. before the commissioner (imports), the high seas sellers raised the plea that although they had sold the mulberry raw silk .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 2011 (TRI)

HwashIn Automotive India Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai

Decided on : Jan-24-2011

..... taxable service namely 5% of the net sales value of the goods and that income tax was remitted for the purpose of compliance with the provisions of the income tax act and the procedure for grossing up of amounts for the purpose of calculating income tax is as per section 195a of the income tax ..... act and that the income tax remitted on the value of taxable service is over and above the amount charged by the service provider and does not form part of the amount payable as per the contract. in this connection, they rely upon a chart showing details of gross .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //