CENEX UPDATE - 28.04.2020

CX - CENVAT credit availed in advance by treating pig iron moulds' as inputs in place of they being treated as 'capital goods', would not be reason for imposition of equivalent penalty when credit itself is allowed in the next financial year : CESTAT CX - Appellant was merely a Director and was not looking after the business affairs of company - Penalty u/r 26 of CER is not imposable since actual involvement of appellant has not been established : CESTAT ST - Appellant constructed independent buildings having one residential unit only - Thus, even if he had constructed more than 12 independent buildings, the nature of activity would not be 'construction of complex' hence demand of service tax is not sustain: CESTAT Cus - Provisions of Rule 9(1)(e) of Valuation Rules, 1998 cannot be automatically be applied to every import which has surface features of a turnkey contract: SC