Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax 2012 2012 2012 (7) Service Tax - 2012 (7) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Service Tax - Case Laws

Showing 141 to 150 of 150 Records

• 2012 (7) TMI 50 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit – whether appellant liable to pay service tax under 'tour operators' service’ - applicants were engaged in the business of travels and providing its buses on hire on contractual basis to various customers for an agreed commercial consideration – Held that:- In the case of Sharma Transports (2010 (10) TMI 417 (Tri)) unconditional waiver of pre-deposit has been granted to the applicants relying on the letters dated 4.11.2009 and 29.3.2010 issued by the Finance Ministry relating to transport of passengers on point to point basis - issue is stated to be kept in abeyance till such time the matter is examined and suitable clarification issued by the Board – waiver of pre-deposit granted.

  ---

• 2012 (7) TMI 49 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - Consulting Engineers' Service – Held that:- No question of levy of service tax from the appellant under the head 'Consulting Engineer's Service' in respect of the activities like SET, LET, KGTE and CAB.

  Regarding demand of service tax under the head 'Commercial Training or Coaching Service - appellate Society has been working in the educational field under Governmental patronage - all the expenses, whether in the conduct of courses/training programs or in the award of diplomas/certificates, were met by the appellant out of the fees collected by them from the students/trainees. Entire cost of the courses was met out of the fees collected from students/trainees on a Commercial basis. Demand of service tax under the head 'Commercial Training or Coaching Service' is sustainable on merits. - pre deposit ordered.

  ---

• 2012 (7) TMI 30 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Cenvat credit - services of the commission agent - services under the category of Business Auxiliary Services –Held that:- Even after the activities related to business, stand deleted from the definition of inputs credit as per the Board's Circular No. 943/4/2011-C.X., dated 29-4-2011, the Service tax paid on commission on agent services would be available - period involved in the present case is prior to the amendment to the definition of input services – In favor of assessee

  ---

• 2012 (7) TMI 28 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Stay application – waiver of pre-deposit – whether Input Service Distributor (ISD) cannot distribute the credit for only one manufacturing premise, when they have various manufacturing units – Held that:- In the case of Ecof Industries (P.) Ltd. (2009 (10) TMI 171 (Tri)) provisions of Rule 7 has been analysed in depth and has been settled that the ISD can distribute the credit even to only one unit - Application for waiver of pre-deposit allowed – stay application allowed

  ---

• 2012 (7) TMI 27 - CESTAT, KOLKATA
  

  Applicability of Notification No.45/10 dated 20.07.2010 issued under section 11C - Held that:- Powers conferred by section 11C R.W.S 83 of the said Finance Act the service tax payable on said taxable services relating to transmission and distribution of electricity provided by the service provider to the service receiver not being levied in accordance with the said practice during the period up to 26th day of February, 2010 for all taxable services relating to transmission of electricity and the period up to 21st day of June, 2010 for all taxable services relating to distribution of electricity - in favour of assessee.

  ---

• 2012 (7) TMI 26 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD
  

  Works contract Service - Turnkey contract - Revenue contended the same to be the contract of Erection, Commissioning and Installation services classifiable under the category of Erection, Commissioning and Installation services - period involved prior to 01.06.07 - Held that:- There is no dispute that the entire demand is in respect of services rendered by the appellant under the turnkey contract to the service receiver. It is also to be noted that the appellant had considered this turnkey contract as a works contract. Thus, appellant has made out a prima facie case that prior to 01.6.2007 service tax liability on works contract does not arise. Pre- deposit waived and recovery thereof stayed till disposal of appeal. See Asea Brown Boveri Limited (2011 (2) TMI 1093 (Tri)) - Decided in favor of assessee.

  ---

• 2012 (7) TMI 25 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Denial of claim of exemption by Notification No. 24/04-ST dated 10.9.04 - Voluntary training and coaching in the field of 1) Business 2) Fashion Technology 3) Advertisement and Graphic Design 4) Media 5) Hospitality and 6) Hospital Administration. - branches in ten cities across the country - Held that:- As decided in Ashu Export Promoters Pvt Ltd Vs CST New Delhi [2011 (11) TMI 387 (Tri)] the impugned training would qualify to be Vocational training'

  ---

• 2012 (7) TMI 24 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Demand of Service Tax on Clearing and Forwarding services received - period from 16.07.1997 to 31.08.1999 - show cause notice on 22.04.2004 – Held that:- demand is not sustainable since the show cause notice was issued under Section 73 of Finance Act, 1994 and on the day on which show cause notice was issued, the Section 73 was not applicable in respect of short levy arising in respect of the ST - 3 returns filed under Section 71A – In favor of assessee

  ---

• 2012 (7) TMI 23 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Construction of Residential Complexes undertaken by the appellants - value of free supplied materials - adjudicating authority has not given the benefit of Notification No. 15/2004 – Held that:- If free materials were supplied by the principals to the appellant, if the value needs to be included in the gross value, that is claimed as a portion of the material, if so, the benefit of the Notification No. 15/2004 could not be restricted and it is for the adjudicating authority to see whether the records maintained by the assessee/supplier are enough to come to a conclusion, that the appellant can avail the benefit of Notification No. 15/2004 and only charge service tax on the balance of 33% of the value sought to be included - matter remanded to the adjudicating authority

  ---

• 2012 (7) TMI 22 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Refund – limitation – refund claim on the ground that building construction which was done by assessee was to a non-profit organization - construction service provided by it to non-profit organization was not liable to service tax under Circular No. 80/10/2004, dated 17-9-2004 – Held that:- they have paid the amount by mistake and therefore they are entitled for the refund - once there was no compulsion or duty cast to pay this service tax, amount paid by petitioner under mistaken no objection, would not be a duty or "service tax" payable in law. Therefore, once it is not payable in law there was no authority for the department to retain such amount - appellant authorities is directed to refund

  ---

1 ....45678