Proviso (ii) to Rule 9 (2) of Customs Valuation Rules, providing for addition of 1% in assessable value is to be read down to apply when actual charges of loading, transportation etc are not ascertainable - Wipro Ltd vs Asst Collector of Customs - 2015 TIOL 79 SC CUS.

 In case of ex-factory sales, transportation charges from place of removal to place of delivery is not includible in assessable value for payment of excise duty - CCE vs Ispat Industries Ltd - 2015 TIOL 40 SC CX.

 When goods are delivered at premises of buyer assessable value to include value of freight, insurance and unloading charges - Commr. of Customs vs Roofit Industries Ltd - 2015 TIOL 87 SC CX.

 HC refuses to stay operation of Rule 5A regarding audit by CAG - Inditrade Derivatives and Commodities Ltd vs UOI - 2015 TIOL 1010 HC KERALA ST.

 Amending Notification 4/2014 ST extending the exemption to services provided by cord blood banks by insertion of Sl No 2A in Notification No 25/2012 is clarificatory and has no retrospective effect - Lifecell International Private Ltd vs UOI - 2015 TIOL 844 HC MAD ST.

 Although service provider can contractually transfer service tax burden on recipient on basis of such agreement revenue cannot be asked to recover dues from third party - Delhi Transport Corporation vs CST - 2015 TIOL 961 HC DEL ST.

 Principle of unjust enrichment is not applicable when supplies are made by assessee , a wing of Government to Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation - Sescot Sheet Metal Works Ltd vs CESTAT - 2015 TIOL 1048 HC MAD CX.

 Time bar as per Section 11B is not applicable for rebate claims under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise vs Dorcas Market Makers Private Ltd - 2015 TIOL 820 HC MAD CX.

 When there is only a contract of hire and there is no renting of the cab, there is no question of the assessee being assessed in respect of services rendered in connection with rent-a-cab as there is no renting at all. Commissioner of Customs & C.Ex., Meerut-I Vs R.S.Travels - 2015 (38) STR.3 (Uttarakhand).

 When the statute provides for a specific period of filing an appeal and also confers specific powers to condone the delay, the appeal if not filed within the specific period or the extended period, then the assessee cannot invoke Article 226 to get over the statutory dictate - Sony Rebeiro Vs Commr. of Service Tax(Appeals), Cochin - 2015 (38) STR 5 (Ker).

 Issue regarding relevant date for limitation under Clause 6 of Notification 5/06-ST returned by larger bench as there are no two conflicting views for referring matter to larger bench - Commr of Customs vs Ration Pharma India Pvt Ltd - 2015 TIOL 645 CESTAT MUM LB.

 An EOU is supposed to export entire production from the unit and DTA sales is an exception granted to an 100% EOU - Amod Stampings Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs, Kandla - 2015 (318) ELT 468 (Tri.-Ahmd.)

 Mere common partners and proprietor of other concern, and use of staff etc., would not be sufficient to hold that units are one and the same - CCE., Chennai-IV Vs B.K.Office Needs (P) Ltd - 2015 (318) ELT 288 (Tri.-Chennai).

 Declared transaction value cannot be rejected on the basis of Chartered Engineer's report, which is based on the enquiry conducted behind the assessee's back and which had not even been supplied to the assessee - Marque Enterprises vs Commr of Customs - 2015 TIOL 592 CESTAT DEL.

 Payment of service tax as directed by DGCEI and filing of application for closure of matter under Section 73(3) bars assessee from claiming refund of same amount later on - Nukay vs CCE - 2015 TIOL 607 CESTAT MUM.

 Amount shown as loan to group company in books cannot be treated as advance for provision of service - Reliance Infratel Ltd vs CST - 2015 TIOL 602 CESTAT MUM.

 Duty cannot be demand on EOU for scrapping / writing off inputs imported free of customs duty or procured free of excise duty - Barco Electronic Systems Pvt Ltd vs Commr of Customs - 2015 TIOL 605 CESTAT DEL.

 Cost incurred for transportation and handling of goods at premises of jobworker is liable to be included in assessable value when such costs cannot be disintegrated from contract between manufacturer and jobworker - K.G.Naidu Mills vs CCE - 2015 TIOL 724 CESTAT MAD.