Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Case Laws
Home Case Index All Cases
Law
Court
Citation -
Landmark
Order by
 

 

Case Laws - Case Laws

Showing 41 to 60 of 266078 Records

  • 2018 (2) TMI 1124 - CESTAT, BANGALORE

    M/s. Ocimum Systems Pvt. Ltd Versus COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX Service Tax-II, Bangalore

    Penalty u/s 78 - intent to evade - Held that - there was no intention to evade service tax on the part of the appellant because the appellant has filed the returns and in ST-3 return, he has shown the adjustment under Column D2 instead of D4 which is only an error in disclosure - from the perusal of the service invoice which is placed on record and also the credit notes issued by the appellant and the disclosure in the service tax return, there i....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1123 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Raigad Versus SRK Enterprises

    Monetary limit involved in appeal - Non-discharge of tax liability - Held that - the disputed tax liability is less than 10 lakhs and as per the litigation policy of the Government of India, the appeal stands dismissed........ + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1122 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    M/s. Manish Contractor Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore

    Manpower and recruitment agency service - demand of service tax of ₹ 6,60,859/- pertaining to EPF and ESI - Held that - service tax demand cannot be confirmed on the employer s contributed amount towards P.F., E.P.F. and E.S.I. - demand set aside. - Service of packing - job of packing / branding of toilet soap in the factory of M/s. Godrej Consumer Products - demand of service tax - Held that - it appears that packing cost included in the f....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1121 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    Apex Advertising Versus CCE And ST, Jaipur-I

    Advertising Service - non-payment of service tax - Held that - the service Tax in respect of the services provided by the appellant had already been discharged by the main advertiser. Hence, it is not the case of non-payment of tax by the appellant for providing the taxable service. - Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Lone Star Engineers 2016 (9) TMI 489 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH have held that the payment of main contractor on behalf of ....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1120 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolhapur Sharda Industries

    Taxability - manpower supply and recruitment agency services - Held that - the respondent was awarded specific jobs and not the supplies of labour and the consideration paid for such specific jobs was based upon per piece and not on salary basis to the employees/labour utilized for such activity - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue........ + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1119 - CESTAT, BANGALORE

    Asea Brown Boveri Ltd. Versus CCE&ST, LTU, Bangalore And Vice-Versa

    Levy of service - works contract service - execute turnkey contracts for supply, erection, installation and commissioning of power transmission and distribution systems - Held that - this issue is no more res integra and has been settled by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of L&T Ltd. 2015 (8) TMI 749 - SUPREME COURT wherein the Hon ble apex court has held that prior to 01/062007, there was no charging section to specifically levy service ta....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1118 - CESTAT, BANGALORE

    Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Belgaum Versus A-4 Investigators

    Jurisdiction - power of Commissioner (A) to remand - Held that - there is no infirmity in the impugned order whereby the Commissioner (A) has only remanded the matter to the original authority - the Commissioner (A) has the power to remand the case to the original authority under the Service Tax - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue........ + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1117 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Sri Ganesh Wind Power Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Tirunelveli

    Penalty u/s 78 - Erection, commissioning and installation services - short-payment of service tax - Held that - substantial amount of the service tax has been discharged prior to issuance of show cause notice - the penalty imposed in the present case is unwarranted - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant........ + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1116 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    Modern Agencies Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem

    Clearing and forwarding agency service - appellant received ₹ 2,91,000/- per month from IOCL and did not discharge the service tax on said amount - Department was of the view that the said amount is also includible in the total taxable value in respect of C&F Agency services - Held that - Larger Bench decision in the case of Sri Bhagawathy Traders Vs CCE Cochin 2011 (8) TMI 430 - CESTAT, BANGALORE relied upon which has held that only the ac....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1115 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore

    Refund of service tax - N/N. 40/2007-ST dated 17.9.2007 - input services - Held that - It is not disputed that the appellant has filed the refund claim under the said notification. However, later by N/N. 17/2008 dated 1.4.2008, the impugned services have been included in the specified services. Since the refund claim pertains to services prior to 1.4.2008, the appellant having sought refund under N/N. 40/2007 is not eligible for the refund since ....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1114 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    M/s. ABC Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Versus CST, Chennai

    Valuation - includibility - amount of ₹ 3,39,539/- was received by the appellants towards reimbursement of advertisement charges from their client M/s. Watanmal Pvt. Ltd. - Department was of the view that these expenses are incurred in providing the taxable service and has to be included in the total value for the purpose of discharging service tax - whether the amount of ₹ 3,39,539/- received by the appellant would fall under reimbur....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1113 - CESTAT CHENNAI

    ETA Constructions (India) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai

    Classification of services - appellant constructed a shopping mall namely Chennai Citi Centre and also individual dwellings in Tsunami affected areas at Kanyakumari on behalf of World Vision India which is a non-profitable organisation - also, another project undertaken by the appellant was construction of residential quarters for Central Government and Defence Department and Theni Medical College - appellant contends the activities to fall under....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1112 - SUPREME COURT

    Commissioner of Central Excise Versus M/s BHEL

    Classification of goods - components/parts of a boiler - whether the essential components/parts of a boiler cleared by the assessee would attract duty under sub-heading 8402.10 of the first schedule of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 or sub-heading 8402.90 of the said schedule? - Held that - relying on the HSN note Part V under Section XVI, it is concluded that such components which are essential to classify the boiler as a machine, even if trans....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1111 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

    Commissioner, Central Gst And Central Excise, Vadodara - II Versus Gujarat Guardian Limited

    CENVAT credit - input service - outward transportation of final products from the place of removal - Rule 2(I)(ii) of CCR - Held that - issue has been decided in the case of COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. & CUSTOMS Versus PARTH POLY WOOVEN PVT. LTD. 2011 (4) TMI 975 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT , where it was held that main body of the definition of term input service is wide and expansive and covers variety of services utilized by the manufacturer. By no st....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1110 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

    M/s. Som Aromatics, Nissar Hussain, V.K. Bansal (Manager) , Atul Kumar Agarwal, Commissioner, Customs & Central Excise, Noida And Vice-Versa

    Clandestine removal - Gutkha under the brand name Dilbagh - It appeared to the officers of Central Excise department from the loose slips found, clearances of Gutkha without payment of duty - demand based on loose slips found and statements of persons - Held that - the Annexure A which quantified the demand was based on various presumptions including the quantity of HSD required for running for one hour, the number of pouches that can be manufact....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1109 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

    M/s. HCL Technologies Ltd. Versus CC & CE & ST, Noida

    CENVAT credit - certain equipments procured for providing taxable output service - FACT-10 Meter RF Shielded EME chamber - Heater with blower & panel with accessories - Clean air management system and prefabricated clean room enclosure - Infiniti Pro P-IV 3.2 Ghz personal computer - whether on the items in question appellant is entitled to avail Cenvat credit on not? - Held that - the appellant has taken Cenvat credit as capital goods on the ....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1108 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

    M/s. Raja Udyog Pvt. Ltd. Versus CC, CE & ST, Noida

    Deposit of Excise Duty with Central Government - Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - CENVAT credit on intermediate goods - Held that -issue decided in appellant own case M/s Lamicoat International Pvt. Ltd., Shri Lok Nath Prasad Gupta, Director, Shri Om Prakash Gupta, Director, Shri Dipankar Ghosh, Manager Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida 2015 (9) TMI 679 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , where it was held that as the appellant has paid ....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1107 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Mohan Sakharam Survase, Rajkumar D Survase, Dattatrauya S Survase, K.A. Jaysinha Reddy, Suresh Engineering Corporation, Ganesh Builders Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III

    Sub-contract - job-work - case of the department is that even though the job work fabrication and erection of the pipeline was sub-contracted to Shri K.A Jaysinha Reddy, M/s.Ganesh Builders was held to be the manufacturer as the ownership of pipes was with Ganesh Builders - Held that - Irrespective of the fact that the Ganesh Builders is the owner of the goods but manufacturing was not carried out by Ganesh Builders and it is admittedly carried o....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1106 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Yash Industries, Shreeji Aluminium Pvt. Ltd., Paresh B. Patel And B.S. Roadways Versus Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) , Pune -III

    CENVAT CREDIT - invoices issued without receipt of goods - Held that - only for the reason that the transporter refused the transportation of goods or that invoices were not appearing in gate register or no GRN was prepared by M/s Yash Industries, credit cannot be denied - It is not disputed that M/s Yash Industries are regularly purchasing rejected profile from M/s Shreeji and are using the same as raw material. The goods stands recorded in raw ....... + More


  • 2018 (2) TMI 1105 - CESTAT MUMBAI

    Mahanagar Gas Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai

    Refund claim - trade discount - price variation clause - Held that - the trade discount was not known to prior to the clearance and thus at the time of clearance, the assessable value can only be ascertained on the basis of trade discount which was known to the buyer - Variation on the transaction value on a subsequent date cannot result in re-determination of assessable value - refund cannot be allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against appell....... + More


3........
 
 
 
Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version