|
Advanced Search Options
Service Tax - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 97 Records
-
2008 (3) TMI 771
... ...
... ... ..... med on the basis of the internal audit report for the year from 1981-82 and 1987-88 when he was working as Executive Engineer at Ooty and even though time was granted by this Court in the above writ proceedings to conclude the enquiry, the respondents have failed to complete the enquiry and pass final orders. On the other hand, taking into consideration the date of retirement, two days before his retirement once again he was placed under suspension and was not allowed to retire from service on the ground of pendency of departmental proceedings, which is contrary to the above said G.Os. and orders passed by this Court . Therefore, the order passed by the learned single Judge in the contempt proceedings is beyond the scope of the contempt proceedings. Therefore, on the basis of the order passed in the contempt petition, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the Writ appeal is allowed. There will be no order as to costs.
-
2008 (3) TMI 695
... ...
... ... ..... invited to Section 73 (3) of the Finance Act and also a Board s Circular based on that. The Circular and also the Section 73(3) provides that if the assessee cleared the Service Tax due along with interest on his own and even on the insistence of the departmental authority, then no penalty proceedings can be taken against them. In other words, all the proceedings against the appellants will be deemed to have been concluded. In view of the above position, we are of the view that the impugned revisionary orders, enhancing the penalties and imposing penalties under section 78, are not in order. Further, the impugned order in Sl. No. 4 is also very harsh especially when the appellants had paid the entire amount of Service Tax and interest even before the issue of Show Cause Notice. In such circumstances, we allow the appeals with consequential relief, if any. The impugned orders are set aside. (Operative portion of this Order was pronounced in open court on conclusion of hearing)
-
2008 (3) TMI 664
Port services - Department contended that appellant activities of handling, stevedoring, loading, unloading, tug hire and labour arrangement is covered under 'Port service' and accordingly demand were made along with penalty - the decision in the case of VELJI P. & SONS (AGENCIES) P. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BHAVNAGAR [2007 (8) TMI 35 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD], contested, where it was held that the department contention was not correct and set aside - Held that: - the decision in the above case upheld - appeal dismissed.
-
2008 (3) TMI 652
... ...
... ... ..... He also drew my attention to the Chennai Bench 39 s another decision rendered in the case of R.R.D. Tex Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem 2007 8 STR 186 and Mumbai Bench decision rendered in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur v. Visaka Industries Ltd. 2007 8 STR 231. He submits that in terms of the rulings of all the Benches cited supra, the very issue is settled in the assessee 39 s favour and therefore the impugned orders are legal and proper. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) as extracted above. All the rulings, including this Bench judgment rendered in the case of Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd. 2007 8 STR 166 (Tri.-Bang.), are in support of the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals). As the issue is fully settled by the judgments cited supra in the assessee s favour, I do not find any merit in the Revenue s appeals and the same are rejected.
-
2008 (3) TMI 418
Cenvat Credit- The assessee availed Cenvat Credit on Inputs/capital goods on basis of the invoices, wherein the suppliers had mentioned the brand name and address of the assessee. The adjudicating authority denied credit on the ground that the invoices did not bear the assessee’s name. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the adjudication order. Held that- there was no dispute that inputs/capital goods had suffered duty and were used in the manufacture of final products. In any event, brand name of the assessee with its address instead of company’s name in the invoices established ownership of the goods. So the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly allowed the credit. Accordingly, no reason was found to interfere with the order of Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal filed by the revenue was to be rejected.
-
2008 (3) TMI 319
Packaging Service – Bottling of liquor – manufacture versus packaging – applicability of service tax - packaging and bottling of liquor come within the ambit and sweep of manufacture within the meaning of clause (f) of Section 2 of Central Excise Act, 1944 in view of the definition contained in Section 65(76b) of the Finance Act especially keeping in view the exclusionary facet and further regard being had to the circular issued by Central Board of Excise and Customs – bottling of liquor is not subject to service tax under packaging service.
-
2008 (3) TMI 318
Photography Service – colour photo laboratory - The colour photo laboratory in fact is an extended design of a studio - In a photography studio the photographer shoots the photos, thereafter in his dark room he develops negatives and, thereafter prints the desired size of the photographs - The work of the colour laboratory is to receive the exposed negatives/rolls, develop the same and print the photographs of the desired size as per the orders placed by the original consumer through the photographer who had taken the photographs either in the studio or anywhere else. - colour laboratories would be a part of the “photography studio or agency” involved in providing the service to the consumer and are amenable to the service tax – held that service tax on colour photo laboratory is not unconstitutional – service tax can be levied .
-
2008 (3) TMI 313
Whether bottling of liquor amounts to manufacture of liquor or only packaging so as to attract the Service Tax? – Held that packaging and bottling of liquor come within the ambit and sweep of manufacture within the meaning of clause (f) of Section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in view of the definition contained in Section 65(76b) of the Finance Act especially keeping in view the exclusionary facet and further regard being had to the circular issued by Central Board of Excise and Customs.
-
2008 (3) TMI 303
Appellate authority has remanded the case with the direction to re-calculate the taxable value - Original authority has not recorded detailed findings for rejecting the request for taking a lenient view under Section 80 of the Finance Act as regards the penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 - original authority is directed to consider this request also during re-adjudication process
-
2008 (3) TMI 302
Whether the credit in respect of Service Tax paid on the goods on the strength of TR-6 challan can be denied - Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Essel Pro-Pack Ltd. rejected the revenue’s appeal on this issue - Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief.
-
2008 (3) TMI 295
Application for waiver of pre-deposit of the service tax and penalty - Demand confirmed on ground that the applicant is providing service of C/F agent - contention is that the applicants are paying service tax on the commission received by them - case of the Revenue is that the expenses in respect of service provided by them are not added while calculating service tax liability – in view of tribunal’s decision in applicant’s own case, the present applicant is directed to deposit 50% of the tax
-
2008 (3) TMI 291
Whether Cenvat credit on capital goods for manufacturing activity can be used for payment of GTA service during the period 1-1-2005 to 30-9-2005 - Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Adjudication Order following the decision of the Tribunal in Nahar Industrial Enterprises v. CCE where tribunal decided the issue in favour of the respondent - In view of the above, Order of the Commissioner (Appeals) require no interference – revenue’s appeal is rejected.
-
2008 (3) TMI 290
Petitioner, Co-operative Society is engaged in the activity of ensuring a safe and cleaner environment by undertaking treatment of industrial effluents and industrial waste materials with the aid of the Central and State Government - this activity for ensuring protection of the environment is certainly an activity in public interest - Central Government should duly consider the request of petitioner for exemption from service tax - interim stay against recovery of any service tax is granted
-
2008 (3) TMI 286
Penalties for non-payment of service tax - service tax levy being a new, appellant were not aware of the same and the entire service tax stands paid along with interest before issuance of show cause notice. As such, they have prayed for setting aside the penalties in terms of the provisions of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 - by taking into account the fact that the entire tax stands deposited along with interest, personal penalties imposed upon all the appellants are set aside
-
2008 (3) TMI 285
Assessee’s claim for refund of service tax and interest on ground that handling of export cargo has been exempted from payment of service tax under the category of “cargo handling service” and that they had erroneously paid service tax on such export cargo handled by it – in view of definition of Cargo Handling Service, service tax is not imposable on handling of export cargo - assessee’s claim is acceptable – refund was rightly sanctioned by tribunal
-
2008 (3) TMI 280
Writ petition for quashing the revision order passed by the Commissioner - against impugned order, alternative remedy of filing appeal before tribunal has not been availed by the petitioner - petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file appeal within 30 days from today before the Tribunal - same shall be entertained and decided on merits by the Tribunal within a period of three months, without insisting for further pre-deposit
-
2008 (3) TMI 279
Photography service - appellants availed benefit of Notification No. 12/2003 dated 20-6-2003, but the same has been denied on the ground that they have consumed inputs and not sold the same - As the issue is covered by the Tribunal’s judgment in case of Shilpa Color Labs. and Adlabs in the assessee’s favour, the stay application is allowed by granting waiver of pre-deposit the amount and staying its recovery till the disposal of the appeal
-
2008 (3) TMI 277
Adjudicating authority has relied upon the definition of “tour operator” while confirming demand - applicants liability of service tax prior to 10-9-2004, the issue is settled in favour of applicant - As regards the service tax liability, post 10-9-04, category of “tour operators”, not cover the activities of the applicant - It is also to be considered whether the applicant being a State Government Organization would fall under the category of tour operator or not – stay not granted completely
-
2008 (3) TMI 276
In L.H. Sugar Factory Ltd. it was held that SCN issued u/s 73 was not maintainable in case of entities who were not liable to file service tax returns u/s 70 but u/s 71A and that section 73 did not cover cases of liability u/s 71A – in view of above case, commissioner allowed the assessee appeal – impugned revenue’s appeal against decision of commissioner both on merits as well as time bar, is dismissed
-
2008 (3) TMI 271
Refund claim was rejected in OIO on the ground that in the retrospective amendment to the Finance Act, vide service tax liability has to be discharged by the receiver of the services of C/F agents – It is noticed that the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Appeal No.ST/45/01 had rejected the Appeal filed by assessee - decision/judgment of the co-ordinate Bench applies in all fours in this case also, as it is in respect of the very same order-in-appeal – hence impugned appeal is dismissed
|
