|
Advanced Search Options
Service Tax - Case Laws
Showing 41 to 60 of 122 Records
-
2011 (1) TMI 721 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Penalty - assessee was carrying on the business of providing taxi services - once the departmental officers informed him that any person owning or operating even with one vehicle would have to pay the service tax, they registered themselves during March, 2003 and obtained a registration on 26-3-2003 - there is no willful default on payment of such amount and hence, they are not liable to pay the penalty and requested for waiver of the penalty imposed - it is clear, that the assessee came to be constituted in April 2002 as a partnership firm - But once the authorities brought it to their notice, that the Act is applicable even to the person who owns one taxi, promptly they registered under the Act and from that day onwards, they were paying the service tax - the authorities in exercise of their discretion under Section 80 of the Act, which is conferred on them, held that the cause shown is a reasonable cause and waived the penalty, which is purely a question of fact - Appeal is dismissed
-
2011 (1) TMI 720 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Waiver of pre-deposit - Scientific and Technical Consultancy services - The Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the penalty levied u/s 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - The challenge to the impugned order is only in relation to the penalty aspect which has been set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals). Being so, there is no executable order as such in the matter - The application for stay, therefore, is dismissed.
-
2011 (1) TMI 716 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Penalty - Revisional Authority initiated review proceedings against the said order and found that the reason given by the assessee is not a reasonable one and therefore the order of the Original Authority dropping the proceedings was set aside and imposed the penalty - it is not in dispute that the branch office at Bangalore was under the impression that the head office is paying the service tax on their behalf. When it was pointed out that no such payment is made, they got separate registration at Bangalore and paid the entire service tax with interest - The fact finding authority on appreciation of the entire material on record coupled with the fact that even before the issue of show-cause notice, the assessee has paid the service tax with interest, a case for wavier is made out - Appeal is dismissed
-
2011 (1) TMI 715 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Application for stay - GTA services - Waiver of pre-deposit - Notification Nos. 32/2004-S.T., dated 3-12-2004 and 01/2006-S.T., dated 1-3-2006 - it has been decided that recipient of GTA service was not required to furnish evidence of not availing cenvat scheme to qualify for the disputed benefit - there is no such condition in the notification. Notification benefit should be allowed also for the period after issue of Circular based on the consolidated declaration obtained from GTA. The Circular of CBEC cannot prescribe a condition not present in the Notification - Appeal is allowed
-
2011 (1) TMI 714 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
waiver of the pre-deposit - Classification - Since the adjudication order is silent on the exact services rendered by the assessee, we consider it fit to set aside the impugned order, keeping all the issues open, remand the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to reconsider the issue afresh within the allegations raised in the show cause notice, after following the Principles of Natural Justice - Appeal is allowed by way of remand
-
2011 (1) TMI 710 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Commercial or Industrial Construction Service and Construction of Complex Service - Notification No. 15/2004-ST dated 10.9.2004 and Notification No. 18/2005 dated 7.6.2005 - The issue involved is regarding the eligibility to claim 67% of abatement on the gross amount charged, by the appellant, from their clients for executing few contracts - even if the value of the goods like cement and steel is to be included in the gross value, the Revenue could do so and allow the abatement of 67% on such value to the assessee - Since this argument was not advanced before the adjudicating authority, we are of the view that in the interest of justice, it is fit to set aside the impugned order, keeping all the issue open, and remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the issue afresh after following the principles of natural justice - Appeal is allowed by way of remand to adjudicating authority
-
2011 (1) TMI 709 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Condonation of delay - Demand - Notification No. 24/2009, dated 27-7-09 - When the appellants approached the PWD authorities with the order of dismissal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on 15-7-2009, he was informed that as the said activity has been exempted, the appellants being illiterate person and not knowing that the order is required to be challenged, did not file any appeals on the advise of authorities and it was only subsequently, that he was advised to file the appeal - Decided against the assessee by way of direction to deposit Rs. 60,000/-
-
2011 (1) TMI 708 - CESTAT BANGALORE
Cenvat credit - Input services used in the manufacture of dutiable and exempted final products - did not maintain separate accounts as envisaged in Rule 6 (2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 - the assessee had already discharged the liability in terms of the Rule 6 provisions enacted in the Finance Act, 2010 within six months of 8.5.2010 when the President accorded assent to the Finance Act, 2010 - It is submitted that the application filed by the assessee for discharging their liability in terms of the above provisions stands rejected by the jurisdictional Commissioner owing to the pendency of the instant appeal before the Tribunal - In the circumstances, we remand the dispute to the Commissioner to re-determine the liability of the assessee in accordance with law.
-
2011 (1) TMI 702 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Demand - manpower supply services - Appellant being a non-governmental organization engages the services of medical personnel on payment of specified amount. This specified amount is paid by the District TB Control Society. - provisions of Rule 5(2) of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 may prima facie apply to the appellant’s case. If that be so, we are of the considered view that the appellant has made out a case for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts as involved hereinabove - decided in favor of the assessee
-
2011 (1) TMI 701 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Waiver of the pre-deposit - Business Auxiliary Services - the definition of "Business Auxiliary Services" during the period 10.9.2004 to 28.2.2005 (relevant period in the present case) was indicating about the services rendered "production of goods on behalf of the client" , while the amended definition of 16.6.2005 indicated “production of goods for or on behalf of the clients - appellant has made out a prima facie case for waiver of the pre-deposit of the amounts involved - Appeal is allowed
-
2011 (1) TMI 696 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Condonation of delay - the Committee of Commissioners have taken decision on 9.9.09 against filing the appeal - The said decision has been revised by the Committee in a subsequent meeting held on 19.1.10 - If this ground is accepted as sufficient for condonation of delay it may lead to reopening of many cases where the department has chosen not to file appeal - Held that no sufficient cause has been shown to condone the delay - Decided against the assessee.
-
2011 (1) TMI 692 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Refund - Circular No. 120/1/2010 dated 19 th January, 2010 - Circular deals with the procedure, which the authorities have to follow while ascertaining the quantum of credit availed, while deciding the issue regarding refund claim - It is settled law that in cases where judicial or quasi-judicial authorities have to decide any dispute referred to it for its decision, it has to peruse the entire material placed before it before arriving at the final decision on the dispute - The decision cannot be arrived at by observing that the authority would peruse certain materials subsequent to the decision. The perusal and analysis of the entire materials required for the purpose of appropriate decision on the dispute has to precede the actual decision - Appeal is allowed by way of remand to Commissioner (Appeals)
-
2011 (1) TMI 691 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD
Demand - CENVAT Credit - the input services used for construction of immovable property which was subsequently rented, would be admissible as CENVAT Credit - the construction of immovable property cannot be said to be not relating to the business of renting immovable property - he is not prepared for final hearing and also submits that the services received at the time of construction of immovable property cannot be used for payment of Service Tax when the immovable property is rented out because once the immovable property comes into picture, the activity comes to an end - the issue is of interpretation and also of admissibility of Service Tax paid on various services and require detailed consideration of the relevant rules as well as precedent decisions on the subject - requirement of predeposit waived.
-
2011 (1) TMI 686 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Condonation of delay - appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 319/2009, dated 3-8-2009 was filed on 24-11-2009 - This matter came up before the Bench for disposal on 17-12-2010. Vide Note sheet order dated 11-2-2010, this Bench noted that only one appeal was filed though three appeals were required to be filed by the Revenue - It can be seen from the above facts that Revenue has been taking the direction of the Bench very callously and in a cavalier manner. Instead of filing the appeals within the period of 3 months from 11-2-2010, they took almost 5 months to file the supplementary appeals, which is in my view, is a lackadaisical approach towards the directions of the Bench - Applications for condonation of delay are dismissed
-
2011 (1) TMI 685 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Input services - Cenvat credit - Rule 15(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR) - 'air travel agents' service, 'management consultancy' service, 'goods transport agents' service, 'management consultancy' service, 'goods transport agents' service, maintenance & repair service, 'car hiring' ('rent-a-cab') service, 'telephone and mobile' service, 'courier' service 'recovery agent's service, 'rail travel agent's' service, 'warranty handling' service', 'authorised service station' service, 'AMC of photocopier machines', 'club association' service, 'insurance' service, service tax paid on professional fees and packing expenses. It was proposed in the notices to disallow the credit to the assessee on the ground that the impugned services were not 'input services' as defined in Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and the credit taken by the assessee as a manufacture was irregular. On the issue of cenvat credit on (i) (Air Travel Agent's Service), sub-para (ii) (Rail Travel Agent's Service), sub-para (iii) (Car hiring/rent-a-cab service) and sub-para (iv) (Authorised Service Station Service) - matter remanded back for verification of evidences. Cenvat Credit in relation to (Management Consultancy Service), (Maintenance or Repair Service), (Recovery Agent's Service), (Insurance and Courier Service) and (Courier Service) two member bench have difference of opinion - matter referred to larger bench.
-
2011 (1) TMI 679 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Waiver of pre-deposit - construction services and works contract services under Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 - claim of abatement of 67% - cost of free material - Held that:- the issues involved in the present appeal are contentious and arguable and a final view can only be taken at the time of disposal of the appeal. - appellants have not disputed their healthy financial position and has offered to make some pre-deposit, as a condition of hearing of their appeal. - Directed to pre deposit Rs. 5 crores in addition to Rs. 49 lakhs as against demand of Rs. 37 crores.
-
2011 (1) TMI 678 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Clearing and forwarding agent services - payments for the price of coal bought by various persons and arranged the transportation of the same by paying the freight and arranged issuance of railway receipts etc - The lower authorities have relied on the Tribunal's decision in the case of Prabhat Zarda India Ltd. [2002 -TMI - 78 - CEGAT, KOLKATA]- However, the said decision stands over-ruled by the Larger Bench judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Larsen & Toubro Vs CCE (2006 -TMI - 460 - Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi). Apart from the above, also note that the Commissioner has held that the appellants indirectly dealt with the goods and as such has to be held as clearing and forwarding agent - It stands held by the larger Bench that the expression 'directly or indirectly' cannot be from the activity of clearing and forwarding operations - Thereafter, there are a number of decisions of the Tribunal which hold that such type of services would not be covered by the clearing and forwarding agent services.
-
2011 (1) TMI 677 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Refund of service tax paid in excess without availing the abatement under Notification No.13/2008-ST dt. 1/3/2008 - Unjust enrichment - The entire case needs to be appreciated by merits based upon the Chartered Accountant certificate and the balance sheet which indicate the amount as service tax is shown as loans and advances - matter remanded back.
-
2011 (1) TMI 670 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD
Refund claim - Unjust enrichment - Business auxiliary services - job worker - Section 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944 - The total consideration contracted between the respondent and their buyer was inclusive of all the taxes - As such the excess service tax paid by the respondent was only being shown as separate in the invoice and was not actually collected from their customers - By raising the subsequent credit notes, it is only the entries in the books of accounts which were sought to be rectified - Further the Chartered Accountant certificate and the certificate of the buyer also show that the amount of service tax was not received by the respondent from their customers - Accordingly the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected.
-
2011 (1) TMI 667 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Refund - Notification No. 1/2006-S.T., dated 1-3-2006 - Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax has issued second show cause notice dated 9-3-2010, proposing to reject the part of the claim for refund of excess tax on the ground that the Tribunal's order covers only the point of 'unjust enrichment' and does not cover the point of rejection of Rs. 4,00,754/- though the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the petitioner - The observations made in the show cause notice at Annexure-G that the Tribunal has considered only on the point of 'unjust enrichment' and does not cover the point of rejection, does not hold any water in view of the fact that the entire matter has been discussed and final order has been rendered - the writ petition is allowed
|
