Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 441 to 460 of 639 Records
-
2010 (6) TMI 365
Waiver of pre-deposit - loan arranged using the services and the loan amount was used in their business activity - term input service' is wide enough to cover the services utilised by them for the purpose of arranging loan - credit taken is regular - Held that: - applicant could be treated as input service and therefore, the applicant has made out a case for waiver of pre-deposit of the dues - disposal of the appeal
-
2010 (6) TMI 364
Credit of service tax paid on input services - activities in relation to business can cover all activities related to functioning of a business and the expression "business" is of wide import - definition of input services is quite wide and an activity used for business purposes is required to be held as input service - assessee entitled to the benefit of credit of service tax paid - Appeal is allowed
-
2010 (6) TMI 363
Credit of service tax - paid on their behalf by M/s. S.A.S. & Company to M/s. Surya T.V. (media) for advertising their product - relevant invoices not only has the product of the assessees been shown as advertised but the assessees are shown as advertisers - Held that: - service provided is in relation to advertisement for sales promotion of the assessees' products, the lower appellate authority has rightly held that the assessees are entitled to credit of service tax - Appeal is rejected
-
2010 (6) TMI 362
Remission of duty – storage loss - percentage of loss should be arrived at based on "total quantity consisting the opening balance and the quantity received during the month" - original authority as well as Commissioner (Appeals) have correctly applied the instructions of the Board and accepted the contention of the party - department has chosen to file the appeal against the concurrent finding of the authorities which are in conformity with the guidelines of the Board - Committee of Commissioners had no valid reason to disregard the guidelines prescribed by the Board - appeal is rejected
-
2010 (6) TMI 361
Appeal – whether the letter of Dy. Commissioner (Technical) communicating the decision to the Appellant regarding detention of the goods under Section 11 for recovery of duty is an appealable order - Govt. arrears pending recovery from company from whom appellant bought goods – Held that: - Letter of the Dy. Commissioner (Tech.) does not disclose as to under which provisions the goods had been detained - order is set aside and the matter is remanded to Commissioner
-
2010 (6) TMI 360
Exemption - the electric power is used by the respondents for drawing out water from the tube well and lifting the same to a high rise water treatment plant - treated water is thereafter filled in the boiler with the help of electric motors - Commissioner (Appeals) observed that "The process of manufacture of essential oil starts with generation of steam by firing the husk in the boiler" - process regarding drawing, lifting and shifting of water are the processes prior to starting of the manufacturing process of the essential oils – Held that: - in order to generate steam the presence of water in the boiler is absolutely necessary and without generation of the steam, there cannot be manufacture of essential oils - presence of water and the activity which is necessary to heat water in the boiler was being integrally related to the process in relation to the manufacture of the said product - such process being involved in the matter - Notification No. 167/86-C.E cannot be said to be available
-
2010 (6) TMI 359
Valuation - related person - confiscation of goods - penalty of amount equal to evaded duty under Section 114A - importers had obtained the goods cheap, using their influence with the suppliers so that the project could be viable and that the suppliers had obliged them as they wished to procure bricks from the importer's factory at competitive rates in future - relationship certainly influenced the price - Held that: - uphold the enhancement of the value and the duty demand together with interest - Confiscation of goods covered by all bills of entry is sustained - Appeal is rejected
-
2010 (6) TMI 358
Rent-a-cab service – penalty - transportation services - transportation of papers/answer sheets, examiners – agreement terms indicating vehicle itself not given for operation under ownership and management of client - payments made for operating trips to various places - in the case of Kuldeep Singh Gill, transportation or vehicle hire service is different than the service being provided by rent-a-cab scheme operator and the same cannot be held to be covered under the said service category – Held that: - transportation services would not be covered by rent-a-cab service, the appellant cannot be attributed with any mala fide - demand is barred by limitation - allow the appeal on merits as also on limitation
-
2010 (6) TMI 357
Demand of duty – clandestine removal - evidence relating to each of the party has to be appreciated separately - some may be found guilty and others benefit of doubt - setting aside of demand of duty and penalty after appreciating the relied against the said parties can not stand in the way of sustaining the demand of duty and penalty on the appellants - appeal is rejected Penalty - registered dealers have not supplied the goods to the appellants which stand admitted by the Director of the appellant company himself, the non-imposition of penalty on the supplier of invoices on a technical ground cannot give any relief to the appellants - beneficiary of irregular credit taken as they only have utilised it towards discharge of their duty liability - evade payment of duty on the final products
-
2010 (6) TMI 356
Refund – unjust enrichment - issuance of credit note to the concerned buyer before the end of financial year – Held that: - no evidence on record to show that the buyers shall not be given credit in their accounts - no investigation done at the buyers end by the Revenue - burden is not passed on, or it has been reversed, the claim of refund cannot be denied discarding revenue's argument that mechanism of issuance of debit notes and credit notes, if countenanced, it will open flood gates for pilferage of revenue - stay application has become infrustuous
-
2010 (6) TMI 355
Adjudication – natural justice - Apart from using such "third degree words" against the impugned order, there is serious allegations against the adjudicating authority that "the order was already prepared and kept ready and hearing was only an empty formality - appellants had not adduced any evidence for such a claim - The appellants are directed to file an affidavit indicating the basis for making such allegation – Commissioner to file a reply to this specific allegation
-
2010 (6) TMI 354
Refund of Cenvat credit - input purchased without payment of duty for the purpose of export - cleared part of input for home consumption in the domestic market on payment of duty under Notification No. 30/2004-C.E - Held that: - goods obtained duty-free for export purposes has not been exported - duty has been paid under Notification No. 30/2004-C.E. and the said notification has a condition that Cenvat credit on input duty should not be taken, the question of refunding any amount towards such credit cannot arise - appeal is dismissed
-
2010 (6) TMI 353
Issues: 1. Inclusion of value of bought-out battery in Uninterrupted Power Supply System (UPSS) for the purpose of duty discharge.
Analysis: The appeal was directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 280/2002-C.E., dated 26-3-2002. The appellants were served with 11 show cause notices for the period 1990-95 for the demand of differential duty due to the alleged non-inclusion of the value of batteries supplied separately to the purchaser of UPSS being manufactured by them. The Adjudicating Authority and the learned Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demand. The appellant's counsel argued that the battery supplied is a separate commercial commodity and its value should not be added to the UPSS, citing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CCE v. Acer India Ltd. The counsel also highlighted the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Luminous Electronics Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, which stated that the battery cannot be treated as the core of UPSS. The appellant requested either allowing the appeal or referring the issue to a Larger Bench for resolution.
The JCDR contended that the UPSS manufactured by the appellant is a system, and the inclusion of the battery value is justified as it is an essential part for the system to function effectively. The JCDR referred to various cases where similar issues were considered by different Benches. The main issue to be decided was whether the value of the bought-out battery supplied by the appellant along with UPSS, as an optional item not attached to UPSS, should be included for duty discharge.
The Tribunal noted that in a previous case involving the appellant, it was held that the battery is an integral part of UPSS for uninterrupted power supply. The Tribunal also examined the decision of the Larger Bench regarding the classification of UPSS with a battery and concluded that it did not address the valuation aspect. The Tribunal distinguished the case of CCE v. Acer India Ltd., stating that the functioning of UPSS without the battery was ruled out in the current case. Consequently, the Tribunal found the appeal devoid of merits and rejected it, along with dismissing the request to refer the matter to a Larger Bench.
In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the decision against the appellant, emphasizing the essential role of the battery in the functioning of UPSS for uninterrupted power supply, and rejected the appeal and the request for reference to a Larger Bench.
-
2010 (6) TMI 352
Refund - unjust enrichment - assessee paid duty on products without availing the benefit of Notification - Held that: - duty requires to be indicated in the invoices in terms of Section 12A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - appellants have collected the full amount as duty without taking into account Notification No. 21/02 - passing the entire duty burden to their customers by indicating the amount in the invoices - refund claim is clearly hit by unjust enrichment - Appeal is rejected
-
2010 (6) TMI 351
Waiver of pre-deposit - Service tax liability, penalty and interest - on the ground that appellant is providing services of commercial training or coaching - appellant is a society or not - by retrospective amendment, activity of the appellant would get covered under the services of "Commercial Training and Coaching Center" - Held that: - Govt. of India has brought in retrospective amendment to the definition of "Commercial Coaching and Training Centre" which could include the activity of the appellant and liability to service tax arises - Retrospective amendment made by the Act is silent on the question of limitation - application for waiver of pre-deposit of the amount involved is allowed - on the ground of limitation
-
2010 (6) TMI 350
Job work basis - Assessee carry out the process of doubling of single yarn on job work basis - benefit of Notification No. 35/95-C.E - Held that: - assessee does not use the double yarn in the manufacture of fabrics - he is not entitled to the benefit claimed by him under the Notification - Appeal is dismissed
-
2010 (6) TMI 349
Waiver of pre-deposit - Penalty - Revenue is of the view that the activity undertaken by the applicant falls under the category of 'Construction of Complex Service' - appellant was paying service tax at the rate of 12% on the amount received by them after availing abatement of taxable value under Notification No. 1/2006-S.T - revealed during the investigation that the appellants were availing Cenvat credit on input services - appellant was remitting service tax at the rate of 2% on the amount received from their clients under the category of 'Works Contract Services' - appellant has undervalued and paid less service tax - SCN issued - penalty imposed - Held that: - service provided by seller in connection with the construction of residential complex till the execution of such sale deed would be in the nature of 'self-service' and consequently would not attract service tax - taxable service till the execution of sale deeds would be in the nature of 'self service' and consequently would not attract service tax - Waiver of pre-deposit - Allowed
-
2010 (6) TMI 348
The High Court of Bombay dismissed an appeal against a Tribunal order stating that no confiscation order can be passed unless the provisional assessment of bills of entry is finalized. No substantial question of law was found, and the appeal was dismissed with no costs.
-
2010 (6) TMI 347
Stay order – waiver of pre-deposit – modification of stay order - appellants have mis-represented the facts relating to the deposit of the amount - appellants submits, Department is correct and the mistake has occurred due to similarity of figures in two disputes - considering the submissions made on behalf of the applicants and considering the fact that an amount of Rs. 1,22,187/- stands deposited on 12-6-2010, the pre-deposit of the balance amount of duty of Rs. 884/-, interest involved and penalty are waived
-
2010 (6) TMI 346
Admissibility of credit of service tax - service tax paid on GTA services - Larger Bench, In the case of ABB limited v. CCE, decided that credit would be admissible - Bombay High Court, in the case of Coca-Cola Limited, also allowed the credit - Revenue has filed appeal before Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka which is yet to be decided – Held that: - matter remanded to Original Adjudicating Authority, who would take up the issue for decision after the matter is decided by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court – appeal disposed of accordingly
............
|