Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax 2008 2008 2008 (3) Service Tax - 2008 (3) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Service Tax - Case Laws

Showing 81 to 97 of 97 Records

• 2008 (3) TMI 72
  

  Present appeal relates to the payment of education cess at the time of clearance in DTA - appellant’s contention that as Customs education cess stand paid by them at the time of import of the goods, further confirmation of education cess at the time of DTA clearance is not in accordance with the law, is not acceptable - fact that the customs education cess stands paid, will not alter the position – held that education cess is to be levied on all dues of excise, so assessee’s appeal rejected

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 71
  

  GTA service – tax paid for freight incurred prior to 1.1.05 – credit taken on 1.4.05 of the tax paid – whether interest & penalty are imposable for delay in reversing credit – lower authorities have held that the assessee’s availing credit on 1.4.05 of the tax paid was wrong and have demanded interest for the delay in reversing the same (on 29.3.06) – assessing authority approved the payment of tax relating to the half-year 2005, as correct – hence credit was rightly availed – appeal allowed

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 70
  

  Assessee paid Service Tax on behalf of four other Service Tax providers, but later on they came to know that those Tax providers themselves have separately paid the Tax – excess payment of tax – Appellants adjusted the amount of Rs. 92,000 paid in excess in Dec. 2004 while paying tax amount for the month of Feb. 2005 – Department should have advised the Appellants to claim a refund for excess amount – lenient consideration is called for to allow such an adjustment – appeal allowed

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 69
  

  Address of the firm as given in the invoice was different from address given in the registration certificate – contention of the Revenue is that no doubt the invoices were in the name of the appellant but the address is different, so credit is deniable - However, the address is different than the registration certificate. Subsequently, the registration certificate was got amended by the appellant & office address on the invoices were also included in R.C. - denial of credit is not sustainable

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 68
  

  Contract for activities like mining, loading, transporting and unloading of limestone from the mines – According to Revenue, the definition of the term cargo handling includes the activities of loading, unloading, packing etc. of cargo, hence impugned activity is taxable –Comm. (A) was justified in holding that the loading is incidental to mining and transportation – respondent cannot be considered as an agent in the context of rendering cargo handling service – appeal is rejected

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 62
  

  Petitioner were directed to deposit service tax for being not entitled to benefit of Notification – application for waiver of pre-deposit & stay - petitioner has a small colour laboratory & by asking it to deposit the amount of Rs. 2,75,042/-, its right of having the correctness of the order passed by the Asst. Comm. examined by the appellate authority would be lost - 50% of the amount of 2,75,042 deserves to be waived – on payment of 50% of amount, appeal would be restored to file of Commissioner (Appeals)

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 61
  

  SCN issued alleging that activity of leasing out studio would come under video production agency – instead of replying SCN writ petition was filed - issue in this petition was whether impugned activity comes under video production agency – impugned issue has to be determined by fact finding body & challenge to it at stage of SCN, (without providing details to authorities so as to enable them to render finding of fact) isn’t legally sustainable – 15 days granted to assessee to file reply to SCN

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 60
  

  Appellants promoting marketing of car loans for which they receive a commission from such banks - liable to Tax as business auxiliary service - appellants' contention that business auxiliary services provided by a commission agent were exempt Not. 13/03, is not acceptable - Not 13/03 had an explanation which exempts only such commission agents, who cause sale or purchase of goods not for sale or purchase of services like car loans - demand is justified but penalty set aside for bonafide belief

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 59
  

  Assessee didn't collect service tax separately for "advertising agency services" provided to Govt Agencies - cum-tax value - Revenue has argued that assessee have to pay tax on the gross amount of commission received by them even in cases where the service tax was not collected - as per sec. 67 held that when no tax is collected separately, the gross amount has to be adopted to quantify the tax liability treating it as value of taxable service plus service tax payable - revenue appeal dismissed

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 58
  

  Assessee designed & manufactured fire-fighting equipments & installed the same at premises of their customers - as per circular 49/11 /2002, erection and commissioning of the fire-fighting equipment, were taxable under the category of commissioning and installation service and not under heading Consulting Engineer Service - Commissioning or Installation service will be separately taxable under relevant entry and are not chargeable under Consulting Engineer Services - revenue appeal dismissed

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 47
  

  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 - Section 73(3) read with CBEC circular dated 3-10-2007 - In other words, all the proceedings against the appellants will be deemed to have been concluded on clearance of Service Tax along with Interest

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 36
  

  Penalty - appellant paid commission to the foreign agents to procure export orders for their goods. Since the commission was paid in foreign exchange, the appellants were under misconception that they are not liable to pay Service Tax. However, when the departmental authorities informed that they are liable to pay Service Tax, they immediately paid the Service Tax along with interest much before the issue of SCN, penalty is not leviable in view of section 73(3) and CBEC Letter dated 3-10-2007

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 35
  

  The activities related to tax returns other business activities can not be said as Information Technology Services which was excluded from Business Auxiliary Services and therefore, refund of cenvat credit on input services used in providing export of such services is can not be disallowed. The scope of definition of input services is very wide and it covers input services related to business. Refund of cenvat credit is also allowed on export made prior to 14-3-2006 (the date of amendment).

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 34
  

  Turnkey Projects of erection, installation & commissioning of fire safety systems - composite work contract is taxable only w.e.f. 1.06.07 - erection of fire proofing system made taxable under Erection Services only w.e.f. 16.6.05 – later inclusion of any activity in scope of levy imply that it wasn’t included earlier – tax not payable prior to 16.6.05 – Exemption u/not. 12/03 providing tax payable only on 33% of the gross amount, is allowed – input credit allowed – larger period not invocable

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 33
  

  The main activity of the appellants was Data Processing from accounting work to generating MIS reports related to consumers and develop the software for this purpose. During the relevant period Information Technology Service has been excluded from the scope of Business Auxiliary Service. Held that computerized data processing also falls within the scope of Information Technology Service and not liable to tax under BAS

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 32
  

  Appellant had rendered the services to their foreign principals by booking orders in India for their goods. The orders are booked in India and after the orders are booked, the parties concerned directly get in touch with the foreign suppliers. Once the foreign suppliers export the goods to India and receive their payments, a commission is paid to the appellant. Held the appellant has satisfied the requirements of Export of Service Rules, 2005, and entitled for refund.

  ---

• 2008 (3) TMI 11
  

  Delhi Sales Tax - DST - illegal withholding of refund - illegal rectification / revisions proceedings. Reassessment proceedings initiated without intimating original order. Overreach the process of constitutional court - department to bear the cost of ₹ 26,18,000/- in favor of petitioner

  ---

12345