Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax 2011 2011 2011 (9) Service Tax - 2011 (9) 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 21 to 40 of 145 Records

• 2011 (9) TMI 832 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
  

  Demand of service tax, interest and penalty - Tamil Nadu Government undertaking have constructed quarters for the Tamil Nadu police officials - appellants states that as per the definition of the expression “residential complex” under Section 65(91a) of the Finance Act, 1994, it does not include a complex which is constructed by a person directly engaging any other person for designing or planning of the layout, and the construction of such complex is intended for personal use as residence by such person. She also refers to the explanation below the said definition which states that “Personal use” includes permitting the complex for use as residence by another person on rent or without consideration. appeal allowed by way of remand

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 831 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - applicant is a ‘Steamer Agent' and they are collecting amounts on behalf of the steamer for meeting the terminal expenses at different foreign ports relating to the transportation of cargo. The Commissioner has held that the activities for which the charges have been collected by the appellants fall under the ‘Business Support Services' and confirmed demand of Service Tax – Held that:- disputed amount collected by the appellant, prima facie, related to services to be rendered at the foreign ports on behalf of the master of the vessel. Under these circumstances, prima facie, the demand of Service Tax is not sustainable. waiver of pre-deposit granted

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 830 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
  

  Belated payment of service tax – penal action on the ground of failure to pay tax within due dates specified under Section 68 of the Finance Act – Held that:- penalty for failure to pay tax in time does not arise when the service tax has been paid together with interest after a delay, and that show cause notice under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, cannot be issued for imposition of penalty in such a situation, in the light of Tribunal's order in Santhi Casting Works (2008 - TMI - 33121 - CESTAT CHENNAI - Service Tax). Penalty set aside and appeal allowed

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 829 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Out Bound Tours - department has held that the entire amount collected from the tourists including airfare to-and-fro and towards expenses incurred in connection with arrangements like hotel stay and sight seeing was to be included under the category of "Tour Operator Services" – Held that:- Board's Circular F. No. B. 43/10/97-TRU, dated 22.8.1997 has treated the activities of out-bound tours as outside the purview of service tax. the service tax undisputedly stands paid on airfares from India to the first destination in foreign country and for airfares from last destination abroad to first destination in India , as air travel services. pre-deposit waived

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 828 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
  

  Suo motu adjustment of excess service tax paid – Rule 6(4A) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 - Held that:- Noting that the rule provides for suo motu adjustment and also noting that the excess payment could be adjusted only on 28.06.2007 by the issue of a Credit Note, and adjustment was made almost immediately thereafter, unconditional waiver of pre-deposit

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 827 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Eligibility of exemption Notification No.3/94-ST dated 30.6.1994 in relation to Coin Collection Box (public telephone) - Service Tax demand - applicant submits that on identical issue this Tribunal in their own case has ordered pre-deposit of 10% of the Service Tax involved and in this connection. applicant directed to deposit an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- there shall be waiver of pre-deposit of balance amounts

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 826 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Business Auxiliary Service - sub-broker - stock broker/sub-broker – Held that:- their activity cannot be said to be Business Auxiliary Service provided to the main broker. Since, the appellant have to be treated as a broker and the service provided by them is service of stock broker in connection with sale or purchase of securities listed on stock exchange for their clients and since during the period of dispute, it is the main broker who was issuing the transaction note and was receiving the commission from the client, a part of which was received by the appellant as a sub-broker, the question as to whether the part of brokerage received by the appellant as sub-broker from the main broker would attract service tax has to be answered in the light of the judgment on this issue in the case of Vijay Sharma & Co. (2010 - TMI - 78818 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI - Service Tax). - Matter remanded back.

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 825 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit -major portion was demanded under the head “Club or Association Service", minor parts of the demand having been raised under the heads, 'Business Support Service', 'Business Auxiliary Service – Held that:- Counsel for the appellant fairly comes forward with an offer to predeposit a further amount of Rs. 50 lakhs for the purpose of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act. waiver of pre-deposit allowed and stay

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 824 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - demand of service tax is under the head ‘Club or Association Service' - appellant is Employees Welfare Trust constituted by M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd. The impugned demand of tax is on the membership fee collected by the trust from the employees of the said company – Held that:- show-cause notice was issued on the basis of an audit report which was prepared in 2008. There was no manner of investigation prior to or after that date. The appellant objected to the audit objections by submitting that they were not liable to pay service tax prior to the date on which the relevant explanation was added to Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994. Counsel has also been able to bring on record certain decisions which would go to support the plea of bona fide belief which the appellant is said to have maintained during the material period regarding liability to pay service tax under 'Club or Association Service'. The show-cause notice in question was issued after a lapse of three years since the relevant period. Prima facie , the appellant has made out a case against the demand of service tax on the ground of limitation. waiver of predeposit granted

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 823 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit – applicant procures sugar cane from the fields of cane growers - applicant has collected freight charges from the cane growers – demand of service tax – Held that:- amounts paid to the transporters by the applicant were on behalf of the cane growers. The records including show-cause notice, order-in-original and order-in-appeal do not indicate as to the persons on whom freight bills, if any, were raised. applicant has recovered the freight charges paid on behalf of the cane growers, no demand is sustainable on the applicant. waiver of pre-deposit allowed

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 822 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Correctness of format in which the appellant has filed the appeal - manufacturer of excisable goods and paying excise duty on the goods cleared by them - assessee is also paying service tax on GTA service as recipient of the said service – Held that:- CENVAT credit account is a common kitty. In a case where the assessee is only paying excise duty, a dispute relating to CENVAT credit should appropriately be treated as dispute under excise matters and the appeal should be registered as excise appeal. If an assessee is only providing services and utilizing common CENVAT credit for payment of service tax alone, the appeal relating to dispute of CENVAT credit may be treated as service tax appeal. In a case where the assessee is paying excise duty as well as service tax, for administrative convenience, the appeal relating to dispute involving CENVAT credit should be treated as appeal under Central Excise.

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 821 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - applicant has received the entire amount from the company whose products/ brands were endorsed by the celebrities and paid service tax on the entire amount under ‘Event Management' category. Out of the amount received from the company whose products/ brands were endorsed they have retained 20% of the amount with them as their commission – Demand of service tax as 'Business Auxiliary Services' on 20% of the commission so retained by the applicant, along with interest and imposed penalties – Held that:- question of treating 20% of the amount retained by them as representing payment for another service rendered by them to the celebrities may not arise. Further, we also find, prima-facie, merit in the submission of the ld. Chartered Accountant that it would be a case of revenue neutrality in the event of service tax charged on the 20% of the amount retained by them. Waiver of pre-deposit allowed

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 820 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - appellant had received services from a French company - liability of service recipient in respect of services provided from abroad commenced only with effect from 18.4.2006 with the insertion of Section 66A in the Finance Act, 1994 – Held that:- in the case of Metro Cash and Carry (2011 - TMI - 207068 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - Service Tax) franchise service received by the Indian company from abroad was not liable to Service Tax prior to 18.4.2006 irrespective of the fact that certain Notifications issued by the Central Government had made the service recipient liable to pay Service Tax prior to the said date. waiver of pre-deposit allowed

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 819 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
  

  ROM - neither the lower appellate authority nor the Tribunal has gone into any issue and the appeals have been dismissed merely on the technical ground of having been filed beyond the condonable time limit before the lower appellate authority – Held that:- original authority before whom an application has been filed by the appellants for rectifying the mistake of imposing of penalties simultaneously on Sections 76 & 78 of the Act, which was not permissible in view of a specific amendment made to the Act by the Finance Act, 1998, with effect from 10.05.2008, is not precluded from dealing with the rectification application. Hence, the direction given to the original authority by the Tribunal in the impugned order vide para-3 thereof cannot be said to be a mistake by any stretch of imagination. application filed by the Department for rectification of mistake is entirely misconceived and the same is rejected

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 818 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
  

  Penalty on the ground that since the entire excise is revenue neutral as credit of the entire amount of tax is available, they could not be held guilty of suppression so as to invoke the extended period for imposing a penalty under Section 78 – Held that:- when an appellant can take credit and utilise it further for tax payment he would not get any benefit by notices paying tax and, therefore, extended period could not have been invoked. Penalty set aside and appeal allowed

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 817 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Out Bound Tours - department has held that the entire amount collected from the tourists including airfare to-and-fro and towards expenses incurred in connection with arrangements like hotel stay and sight seeing was to be included under the category of "Tour Operator Services" – Held that:- Board's Circular F. No. B. 43/10/97-TRU, dated 22.8.1997 has treated the activities of out-bound tours as outside the purview of service tax. the service tax undisputedly stands paid on airfares from India to the first destination in foreign country and for airfares from last destination abroad to first destination in India , as air travel services. pre-deposit waived

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 816 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Management, Maintenance or Repair Services - amounts collected under the head 'backup power supply' - Commissioner held that the charges collected was to be treated as part of value of taxable service of 'Management, Maintenance or Repair Services' and accordingly confirmed demand of Service Tax – Held that:- transaction involved only sale of electricity and therefore the value of electricity sold cannot be part of value of ‘Management, Maintenance or Repair Services.' waiver of pre-deposit allowed

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 815 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - CENVAT credit on Service Tax paid on GTA service utilized for transport of the cigarettes from the factory gate to the “warehouses” - Board's Circular dated 2.2.2006 may be of any help in the present case as both related to the period prior to 1.4.2008 i.e. before the amendment introduced to Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. However, Commissioner (Appeals), for the subsequent period, has allowed the credit in identical circumstances. pre-deposit waived

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 814 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
  

  Application for Demand - Service tax demand for the period 6/2005 to 3/2008 – Appellant submitted demand relating to the period from April,2008 is fully time barred – Held that :- Appellant demands waiver of balance amount of sum as he voluntarily paid a sum though deficient amount mentioned in MOA – Department decided demand upto the period March 2008 is time barred.

  Service tax demand for the period 4/2008 to 3/2009 – Demand is payable – Directed to pay amount – Subject to the payment waiver be made in respect pre-deposit dues.

  ---

• 2011 (9) TMI 813 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
  

  Penalty – liability to pay service tax - Business Auxiliary Service - period of demand is from 01.07.2003 to 20.09.2004. Prior to 21.07.2003, one Shri C.M. Kamaraj was running the proprietorship concern by the name of M/s. Sakthi Celcom and with effect from 21.07.2004, the present proprietor Shri Jaykumar continued of provision of Business Auxiliary Service to M/s.Aircel Ltd., although arguments are raised as to the liability of Shri Jaykumar to tax prior to the date when he became the proprietor such arguments are not pressed and during the hearing it is clarified that the only challenge is to the imposition of penalties. no penalty can be imposed on the ground that the assessees are not aware of their liability to pay service tax. penalty cannot be totally set aside in the absence of any appeal against imposition thereof by the adjudicating authority. penalty of Rs.1,22,569/- is to be treated as a penalty under the provisions of 76 and penalty of Rs.1000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994, is also upheld. appeal is allowed

  ---

123456........ 8