Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Case Laws
Home Case Index Service Tax
Law
Court
Citation -
Landmark
Order by
 

 

Service Tax - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 18138 Records

  • 2017 (10) TMI 755 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Robinsons Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai

    Classification of services - Port services - activity of transportation of cargo within the port area of Mumbai Port Trust - extended period of limitation - Held that - It is settled law that there are divergent views on the issue and dispute is resolved by the Larger Bench, no malafide or suppression of facts can be alleged on the assesee. Even on the identical issue the Tribunal has held that it was a case of bonafide doubt for which extended p....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 754 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    The Principal Commissioner of Mumbai Versus M/s. Q-India Investment Advisory Pvt. Ltd.

    Refund claim - Rule 5 of CCR - rejection on the ground that services by the respondent was provided in India therefore it cannot be treated as export of service in terms of Export of Services Rules, 2005 - Held that - The law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner vs. SGS India Private Limited 2014 (5) TMI 105 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT will squarely apply to the facts of the case, where it was held that if services we....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 753 - CESTAT BANGALORE

    Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, LTU Versus Yuken India Ltd. And Vice-Versa

    CENVAT credit - ISD - appellant-assessees Whitefield unit took cenvat credit of various locations without distribution of such credit by becoming an ISD - Held that - the entire issue can be decided on the basis of revenue-neutral point itself. It is undisputed that the Head Office of the appellant had availed cenvat credit of the service tax paid on various services rendered at different units of the appellant, as also at the Head Office. It is ....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 752 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Cash Edge Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai-III

    Refund claim - time limitation - Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 - rejection of refund on the ground that the claim have been filed beyond the period of one year from the date of issuance of the export invoice - Held that - the issue is no more res integra and stand settled by Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax, Goa Vs Ratio Pharma India Pvt Ltd. Vs 2015 (4) TMI 462 - CESTAT MUMBAI , where it was held that the re....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 751 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem Versus M/s. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Salem

    Classification of services - Cargo Handling services - respondent is engaged in Drilling, Blasting and Transporting of yellow Bound-quarrying works - Held that - The issue whether loading / unloading of limestone and rejects in mining area would fall under Cargo handling services is covered by the judgement in the appellant s own case Commissioner Vs Thriveni Earthmovers 2017 (1) TMI 717 - SUPREME COURT , where it was held that one year time is t....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 750 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. J.P.P. Mills Private Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) , Salem

    Business Auxiliary Service - commission paid to foreign agents - reverse charge mechanism - Held that - The period involved is 9.7.2004 to 31.12.2006. The provision for payment of service tax under reverse charge mechanism was brought into the Finance Act by introducing Section 66A with effect from 18.4.2006 - The decision in the case of Indian National Ship Owners Association Vs UOI 2008 (12) TMI 41 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT wherein it was held that t....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 749 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    Madurai Acme Enterprises Pvt. Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai

    Classification of services - Management, Maintenance and Repair Services - Works contract service - period involved is prior to 1.6.2007 - Held that - The period is 16.6.2005 to 31.10.2006 - the property in the goods always vests with the customer who gives the rollers for re-rubberisation and therefore the activity is Works Contract Service - appellant is covered by the judgement of Hon ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Larsen & Toubro ....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 748 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Kolhapur Auto Works Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolhapur

    Valuation - includibility - charges for asset usage - Held that - It is not the case of Revenue that the equipment usage referred to in the impugned agreement is one that subsequently would have been taxable as supply of tangible goods - it is clear from the decision of this Tribunal in Sujala Pipes Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Guntur 2014 (7) TMI 932 - CESTAT BANGALORE that discharge of VAT liability is s....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 710 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    M/s. National Institute of Construction Management & Research, M/s. MIT Institute of Design Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-II, Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax

    Classification of services - Commercial Coaching or Training services - scope of term commercial - whether Educational Institution other than colleges/institutes not recognised under the law would otherwise be within the ambit of the taxable service of Commercial Training or Coaching Service? - Section 65 (27) of the Finance Act, 1994. - Held that - the commercial training or coaching for imparting skill or knowledge or lessons on any subject or ....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 709 - CESTAT BANGALORE

    Dream Logistics Company (India) Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax

    Refund claim - port services - rejection on the ground that the invoices issued by the Port and Inland Water Transport department, is in the name of CHA and not in the name of the appellant - Held that - there is no dispute about the payment of service tax on port services and their receipt used by the exporter for export of iron ore fines - the appellant has produced on records, the debit notes issued by the CHA to the appellant and its co-relat....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 708 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    Federation of Indian Export Organisation (FIEO) Versus CST, New Delhi

    Club or Association Service - consideration received from members - Section 65(25a) read with sub-clause (zzze) of Clause (105) of Section 65 of Finance Act, 1994 - Held that - the Tribunal in the case of Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry 2014 (5) TMI 183 CESTAT New Delhi examined almost similar set of facts and concluded that the appellants are engaged in activities having objectives which amounts to public service and are o....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 707 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Venus Engineers Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai-I

    Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme - rejection of declaration on the ground that in terms of proviso to section 106 (1) of the Finance Act, 2013, where a notice or an order of determination has been issued to a person in respect of any period on any issue, no declaration shall be made of his tax dues on the same issue for any subsequent period - Held that - pendency of liability for the past period cannot act as a bar for seeking the advan....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 706 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Creasakthi SCM Ltd Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai-III

    Penalty u/s 77 and 78 - It was alleged that neither any return was filed during the period in question nor any service tax was deposited, no intimation was given to the Revenue as regards the assessee s liability and obligation to pay the said amount to service tax - Held that - there is no dispute on the facts that the assessee is under a legal obligation to file the requisite returns provided under the statute and to discharge its service tax l....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 705 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy

    Penalty u/s 76 and 78 - TDS - non-payment of service tax on three installments of TDS - appellant claims that the omission to pay service tax was only because the appellant was not aware of the non-payment of service tax on the TDS amount - Held that - there was much confusion as to whether the service recipient who is bound to pay the service tax is liable to pay service tax on the TDS portion - Further, since the appellants have discharged the ....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 704 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M. Kanakaraju (M/s. Ranjit Catering Services) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem

    Simultaneous Penalty u/s 76 and 78 - outdoor catering service - bonafide belief - Held that - In various judgments, it has been held that the penalties under both section 76 as well as section 78 cannot be imposed simultaneously and the same was brought into effect by amendment to the sections with effect from 10.5.2008 - In the present case, the demand is made for the period from 6.10.2005 onwards where the services came to be taxable. The appel....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 703 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. OTV Engineering Centre India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai-II

    Refund claim - limitation period - Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 - what is the relevant date to be adopted for the purpose of calculating the limitation period of one year? - Held that - the issue is no more res integra and stands settled by the Tribunal s decision in the case of M/s. Bechtel India Pvt Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service tax 2013 (7) TMI 490 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , wherein the relevant date for determining limitation was determined as the date of....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 664 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

    The Commissioner of Service Tax Mumbai Versus M/s. Prachar Communication Ltd.

    Refund of Service Tax erroneously paid - unjust enrichment - the service tax was erroneously paid on gross amount of bills before the discount was allowed of 15 on the gross bill irrespective of the discount allowed to the advertisements - Denial of refund on the ground that the respondent has failed to furnish documents to establish that the amount of service tax for which the refund is claimed has been collected by the respondent from its clien....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 663 - CESTAT BANGALORE

    Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Belgaum Versus Gujarat NRE Coke Ltd.

    Utilization of CENVAT credit - GTA services - Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 3 of CCR, 2004 - penalty reduced to 25 - Held that - As per the explanation to the Rule 3 of the CCR, 2004, it has been specifically incorporated w.e.f. 01.07.2012 that CENVAT credit cannot be used for payment of service tax on GTA as service recipient and if there is a violation of this rule, then, the assessee attracts penal action u/r 15 of CCR, 2004 for payment of GTA services....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 662 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Bright Marketing Company Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore

    Penalty u/s 78 - non-payment of service tax - whether such non-payment of service tax by the appellant was on account any one of the ingredients mentioned in the said Section 78? - Held that - there is a clear mandate of law provided under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 that any person, who has not paid or short-paid the tax on account of any fraud; collusion; willful mis-statement; or suppression of facts or has evaded any tax provisions wi....... + More


  • 2017 (10) TMI 661 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Tranquil Security Solutions Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai-II

    Non-payment of service tax - Security Services - penalty - whether such non-payment of service tax by the appellant was on account any one of the ingredients mentioned in the said section 78? - Held that - reliance placed in the case of Union of India Vs Rajasthan Spinning Mills 2009 (5) TMI 15 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA laying down that when the statute provides mandatory penalty, the question of payment of duty before or after notice cannot alter....... + More


1........
 
 
 
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version