Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.56 seconds)
Documents citing M/S. Hyundai Motor India Ltd vs Cce Chennai on 7 October, 2015

Ms Earthcon Construction P Ltd vs Ce & Cgst Noida on 6 August, 2025

In the case of Hyundai Motor India (P) Ltd Vs. CCE reported (29) G.S.T.L. 452 (T), the demand of service tax was set aside on the ground of revenue neutrality. The said decision of this Tribunal has been up held by Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2020 (32) G.S.T.L. J54 (SC). We agree with the Appellants contention that they are eligible for Cenvat credit of the amount payable as service tax on reverse charge basis on availing legal services and works contract services. As per table 3 of the impugned order, Appellants had paid service tax Rs.3.22 crore during 2012-13 to 2016-17, besides payment of Rs.65 lakhs during investigation. Therefore if appellants had paid the said amount of Rs.19.66 lakhs on reverse charge basis, it would have availed its Cenvat credit and the corresponding payment of service tax through PLA would have been lesser. Therefore the entire exercise is revenue neutral. We therefore set aside the demand of Rs.19,65,925/- on the ground of revenue neutrality.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vasavi Gold And Bullion Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs-Cc Air Cargo Ch ... on 16 January, 2026

8. Final Order No.41308-41310 of 2024 dated 21.10.2024 in the case of Hyundai Motors Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (Para 8) F. It is submitted that the order in original specifically refers and relies on two materials namely international price of gold at para 3.55 and 3.56 to aver that price of gold mentioned in concerned invoices were almost the same of the price prevailing in the global market and LVAC done were by way of making charges which average 4-5% and not 22% as shown in COO. The order also refers to similar case of imports decided by the Commissioner of Customs CSIA Mumbai made in Order No.08/2014-15 dated 31.12.2014 at para 3.10.2. These materials surfaced for the first time in the impugned order and has not been put to the noticee/appellant in the Show Cause Notice and therefore the findings or atleast a part thereof are outside the scope of Show Cause Notice and hence violative of natural justice.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Softgel Healthcare Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 3 May, 2016

8. In this case, the issue is with regard to eligibility of input service credit on outward transportation of the appellants final products which are cleared for exports from the place of manufacture to the customers premises. On a perusal of the various aspects of the matter, it is not in doubt that the appellants are liable to deliver the goods to their overseas customers. The freight charges incurred on outward transportation is therefore an activity relating to the manufacture of final products. I find that the ruling of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Hyundai Motor India Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai reported in 2016-TIOL-767-CESTAT-MAD supports their contention. The relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted below:-
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1