|
Advanced Search Options
Service Tax - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 1464 Records
-
2008 (12) TMI 830 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the opinion, that, the gross profit declared by the assessee is too low when compared to the nature and volume of business and also keeping in view, that, in the case of the dealers, dealing in liquor in Bar attached Hotels, the normal gross profit is more than 30%, has thought it fit to fix the gross profit at 40% to the conceded turnover of the dealer. The order so passed by the assessing authority was modified by the first appellate authority, by reducing the estimate by adding a gross profit of 25% only. This order of the first appellate authority is confirmed by the Tribunal also. (12) Since there is a concurrent finding by the authorities under the Act and since no question of law as such is involved in this revision petition, we decline to entertain this revision petition and confirm the orders passed by the first appellate authority and the Tribunal. (13) In view of the orders passed in the revision petition, I.A.No.2635 of 2008 is also rejected. Ordered accordingly.
-
2008 (12) TMI 728 - SC ORDER
Extraordinary Jurisdiction - Union of India has indulged in taking a ground which was not available to it - Article 136 of the Constitution of India
-
2008 (12) TMI 668 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... the appellants, during the relevant period, were not at all liable to discharge any Service tax. He submits that in such circumstances, the imposition of penalties is unjustified. 4. On a careful consideration of the matter, we find that the appellants had discharged the Service Tax liability along with interest even before the issue of Show Cause Notice. This Bench, in several cases, had held that when the Service Tax along with interest is paid before the issue of Show Cause Notice, the harsher penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 are uncalled for. In view of this, prima facie, there is a strong case in favour of the appellants in view of the decided case-laws. Hence, we order complete waiver of the pre-deposit of the dues demanded in the said Order-in-Revision till the disposal of the appeal. No coercive measures should be taken till the appeal is decided. Appeal to come up for hearing on 17th March, 2009. Stay application allowed. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 667 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... luntarily pays the amount, no show cause notice is contemplated. 4. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative stated that this is not a case which can be covered under Section 73(3). In fact, the appellants on their own admission collected the service tax amount due to the government, but they have failed to pay it up. But for the scrutiny of the departmental officers, there would have been an escapement of service tax. Therefore, she is of the view that the appellants should be put to terms. 5. On a careful consideration of the matter, we are of the view that at this stage it would be better to waive a pre-deposit of the entire amount of penalties imposed in view of the fact that the service tax along with interest had been discharged much before the issue of show cause notice. Therefore, we order full waiver of the pre-deposit of the dues till the appeal is decided. No coercive measures should be taken till such time. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 666 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... ht of the definition given in Finance Act, the services rendered by the appellant would definitely be taxable under the category of ldquo Commercial Coaching or Training Centre Services rdquo . 8. On a very careful consideration of the issue, we find that this issue was elaborately dealt with by this Bench in the decisions cited (supra). The points urged by the learned Special Counsel have to be examined in depth only at the time of final hearing. It is seen that the appellant is an institution imparting higher education. Prima facie, we cannot equate them with a ldquo Commercial or Coaching Centre rdquo . In our view, the ratio of the cases decided by this and cited supra are applicable to the present case. Hence, we order full waiver of all the dues demanded in the impugned order till the appeal is decided. No coercive measures should be taken to recover the dues till the appeal is decided. Matter to come up for hearing on 16-3-2009. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 665 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... milar cases interest has to be paid and this position has been confirmed by Karnataka High Court. 5. However, the learned Chartered Accountant invited our attention to the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CCE v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. - 2007 (214) E.L.T. 173 (P and H) wherein it has been held that assessee is not liable to pay interest when the Modvat credit irregularly taken was not utilized. This decision has been upheld by the Hon rsquo ble Apex Court as reported in Commissioner v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. - 2007 (214) E.L.T. A50 (S.C.). 6. In view of the fact that the appellants had already reversed the ineligible credit taken and also in view of the above decision, we order complete waiver of the pre-deposit of the penalties and interest till the disposal of the appeal. No coercive measure should be taken till the appeals are decided. The stay application is allowed. Appeal to come up for hearing on 12th March 2009. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 663 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... amount of Rs. 45,544/- has already been reversed by the appellant, as mentioned in the order-in-original. I find that the remaining amount of credit - Rs. 3,45,338/- is in respect of insurance, civil construction inside the plant, repairing of pipes and industrial cleaning and all these services, prima facie, appear to be the input services. Moreover, the demand pertains to 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 period for which the show cause notice was issued on 1-5-07, while the appellant had been filing the ST-3 returns and as such, the major portion may be time barred. In view of these circumstances, the appellant, prima facie have a strong case and I am of the view of this, the amount of Rs. 45,544/-already deposited is sufficient for hearing of the appeal. The pre-deposit of balance amount of the Cenvat credit of service tax and penalty confirmed is waived for hearing of this appeal and the recovery thereof stayed. The stay petition is allowed. (Dictated and pronounced in open court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 662 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... way, there cannot be any demand. With the death of the appellant proprietor, the appellant rsquo s proprietorship ceases to exist and there cannot be any demand. In these circumstances, we order complete waiver of the penalty demanded in the impugned order till the disposal of the appeal. No coercive measures to be taken till the appeal is decided. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 661 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... stated that it is for the appellants to produce evidence for fulfilment of such conditions. As they had not shown any evidence to that effect, the adjudicating authority has denied the benefit of the Notification 32/2004. 6. In the course of hearing, the learned Advocate produced declarations from the Goods Transport Agency to the effect that they had not availed any credit. In view of the clear cut declaration, we find that prima facie, the appellants have a strong case on merits. The learned DR stated that in the consignment note, there is no endorsement and it is a must. In any case, we are of the view that this point can be discussed at the time of final hearing. As prima facie the appellants have a strong case, we order complete waiver of the pre-deposit of the dues demanded till the disposal of the appeal. No coercive measures should be taken by Revenue till the appeal is decided. Matter to come up for hearing on 18th March, 2009. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 660 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... ation of the matter, we find that in terms of the Board rsquo s Circular and also the decision of the Calcutta Bench in the case of CCE, C and ST, Bhubaneshwar-II v. M/s. Vinshree Coal Carriers Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. - 2008 (10) S.T.R. 473 (Tribunal) 2008-TIOL-592-CESTAT-Kol, the transportation of coal/ores within the mining area is not liable to service tax during the relevant period. Prima facie, the appellants have a strong case on merits. Hence, we order complete waiver of pre-deposit of the dues. It is also seen that the appellants had already deposited the tax amounts. Therefore the said deposit may be sufficient for fulfillment of the pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Act. We order full waiver of the balance amount of tax/interest/penalties till the disposal of the appeal. Stay applications allowed. No coercive measures should be taken by Revenue till the appeals are disposed of. Appeals to come up for hearing on 18th March, 2009. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 659 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... mstances, the departmental officers could have investigated the matter further and issued the show cause notice in time for the Service Tax. This has not been done. Prima facie, the appellants have a strong case on time bar. At this stage, it is not very clear whether the appellants had been doing wiring at all time or other activities also, which would be subjected to Service Tax. These points can be examined in depth only at the time of final hearing. For the present, we are inclined to order waiver of pre-deposit of the entire dues till the disposal of the appeal. As regards the merits, it can be decided only at the time of final hearing after all the facts are placed before the Bench. Thus, the stay of recovery of the dues as mentioned above is ordered till the disposal of the appeal. No coercive action should be taken by the revenue till the disposal of the appeal. This case may be placed before the Single Member Bench in its turn. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 658 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... s that the law has undergone amendment several times which might have caused difficulties in interpretation. However, the demand having been raised the same may be directed to be deposited for hearing of the appeal. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records. In view of the facts and submissions of both the sides, we direct that the amount of Rs. Five lakhs be deposited as necessary condition for disposal of the appeal and such deposit if made within four weeks from today and compliance reported on 30-1-2009, realisation of balance demand shall be stayed till disposal of appeal. (Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 657 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... pplicant is paying the money to a person in India on whose behalf the money is transferred from Western Union through M/s. Weizmann Forex Ltd. through the applicant. The definition of the ldquo Business Auxiliary Services rdquo and the ldquo banking and other financial services rdquo needs to be gone into detail along with the agreements entered into by the applicant with the M/s. Weizmann Forex Ltd. and Others. This can be done only at the time of final hearing. As such, we find that applicant has not made out a prima facie case for complete waiver of the amounts involved. Accordingly, we direct the applicant to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Only) within eight weeks from today and report compliance on 12th March 2009. Subject to such compliance being reported, the application for waiver of pre-deposit of the balance amounts involved is allowed and the recoveries thereof stayed till the disposal of the appeal. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 656 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... tation of cargo with or without loading, unloading and unpacking. Transportation is not the essential character of cargo handling service but only incidental to the cargo handling service. Where service is provided by a person who is registered as GTA service provides and issues consignment note for transportation of goods by road in a goods carriage and the amount charged for the service provided is inclusive of packing, then the service shall be treated as GTA service and not cargo handling service. rdquo 7. In view of the above discussion, prima facie, we find that the applicant was providing transportation services, which is not covered within the purview of Cargo Handling Services. Hence, the applicant made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of entire amount of tax and penalty. Accordingly, pre-deposit of tax and penalties is waived till the disposal of the appeal. The stay application is allowed. (Order dictated and pronounced in open court on 30-12-2008)
-
2008 (12) TMI 655 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... repair and reconditioning rsquo of transformers. This is not a dispute. Prima facie, the appellants do not have a strong case on merits. Further it is noticed that the lower authority had not given any abatement towards the cost of material while computing the service tax liability. The Chartered Accountant states that around 25 only will be service component. It is also seen that the lower authority confirmed the demand only with effect from 16-6-2005 when the definition of maintenance contract was amended. Therefore, I order to pre-deposit a sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) which is to be paid within a period of three months from today. On such deposit, the pre-deposit of balance amount of service tax and interest stands waived and its recovery stayed till the disposal of the appeal. The Revenue shall not take any coercive action till the disposal of the appeal. Call on to report compliance on 2nd April 2009. (Pronounced and dictated in the open court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 654 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... bmits that appeal on merit was not contested before the Commissioner properly and in any event they are eligible for availing abatement of 70 from the value of service subject to the fulfillment of conditions of the notification. 4. After considering the submissions of both sides we find that the question, as to whether levy of tax on the applicants on merit would be looked into at the time of regular hearing. The applicant failed to make prima facie case in their favour for waiver of pre-deposit of entire amount of tax and penalty. It is submitted by the learned Advocate that the Government is holding 90 stake in the applicant society. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case we direct the applicants to deposit Rs. 50,00,000-00 (Rupees fifty lakhs only) within 8 weeks. Upon deposit of the said amount, pre-deposit of balance amount of tax and penalty would be waived. Compliance to be reported on 17th February, 2009. (Dictated and pronounced in the Open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 653 - CESTAT CHENNAI
CENVAT credit - GTA services - Notification No.36/2004-S.T. - pre-deposit - stay/dispensation of pre-deposit
-
2008 (12) TMI 652 - CESTAT CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... icants that the nature of the contract entered into between them and their clients was ldquo works contract rdquo as seen from the assessment order passed by the commercial tax officer and this plea not disputed by the Revenue. Therefore, prima facie, it is only with effect from 1-6-2007 that the value of service in works contract became liable to service tax and they have paid service tax for the period after 1-6-2007. In these circumstances, we grant waiver of the pre-deposit of the service tax imposed as well as interest and penalties imposed by the Commissioner and stay recovery thereof during the pendency of the appeal. (Dictated and pronounced in open court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 651 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... rect. He also submits that the appellants do not receive any fees or remunerations from the customers for whom they undertake the work on behalf of M/s. EFL. They receive payments only from M/s. EFL. He also submits that the appellants were treated as rendering business auxiliary services up to 9-9-04 and that they have held to be rendering business auxiliary services from 1-4-06. The department has held them as rendering maintenance and contract service for in-between period which is not permissible. 4. Learned DR reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). 5. We have considered the submissions from both sides. We hold that the applicants have made out a prima facie case on merits in their favour and therefore, we waive the pre-deposit of dues as per the impugned order and stay recovery thereof till the disposal of appeals. 6. These appeals should be linked to connected appeals Nos. ST/631-638/08 filed by the Department. (Dictated and Pronounced in the open Court)
-
2008 (12) TMI 650 - CESTAT CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... Indian recipient of service namely KSEB to discharge the tax due on services it had rendered. The Hon ble Apex Court found that the liability to service tax of KSEB was sustainable in terms of the agreement between the foreign service provider and KSEB. Accordingly, the judgment cited sustained the demand of interest on service tax availed by KSEB. We find considerable force in the submission regarding limitation. On a consideration of the facts of the case, we are satisfied that the application for waiver and stay deserves to be allowed considering the plea of limitation and the fact that the appellants had discharged the tax liability to the tune of Rs. 1,24,48,713/- out of a total liability of Rs. 3,85,96,108/- found due from them before issue of show cause notice. Accordingly, we order waiver of predeposit and stay recovery of the dues as per the impugned order till the final disposal of the appeal. (Operative part of the Order pronounced in the open Court on 8-12-2008)
........
|
