|
Advanced Search Options
Service Tax - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 112 Records
-
2010 (12) TMI 1269 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... having made lump sum payment of rentals he is allowed reduction in the annual rentals payable by him for a specified period. It is thus, clear that the initial payment made by the subscriber is not a deposit. It is a payment of rentals which entitles him to specified reduction in the annual rentals payable by him for a specified period. The amount of reduction and the period is governed by Rule 434 Section IV of the Indian Telegraph Rules quoted above. It lays down that if the initial payment is ₹ 5,000/- then the reduction of rentals is for 20 years at the rate of ₹ 40/- on rentals payable bi-monthly. In our opinion, therefore the petitioner is right in contending that for the purpose of charging service tax, ₹ 340/- is the amount of bi-monthly rentals and not ₹ 380/-. 9. In the result, therefore, Petition succeeds and is allowed. Rule made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) (Exhibit C) and prayer clauses (b) and (d). No order as to costs.
-
2010 (12) TMI 1260 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
Refund claim - Notification No. 41/07-ST dated 06.10.2007 - Duty drawback - held that: - since the goods in question have been exported without availing drawback of service tax under the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax drawback Rules, 1995, therefore recovery of refund claim of service tax paid on specified services on the ground that goods have been exported under claim of drawback is not tenable.
-
2010 (12) TMI 1214 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... s filed for recalling of the Final Order dated 21.12.2009. On perusal of the miscellaneous application, we find that there is no ground made out for recalling of our Final Order No.03/2010 dated 21.12.2009. In view of this, the miscellaneous application is dismissed. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2010 (12) TMI 1184 - CESTAT BANGALORE
... ...
... ... ..... unal.-Ahmd.). 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. We find that the includability of an amount paid as Income Tax by NHAI needs to be considered in detail. It is not disputed in the show cause notice as well as in Order-in-Original that the applicant has discharged Service Tax liabilities on the amount of bills raised by him for the services rendered as per the contract. The issue of includability of income tax paid by NHAI in the gross amount is an arguable one, which needs to be gone into detail. In our considered view, since the issue being debatable, it can be heard in detail at the time of final disposal of the appeal. At this juncture, prima facie, we are of the considered view that the applicant need not be put to any condition. In view of this, the application for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved is stayed and recovery is stayed till the disposal of the appeal. (Pronounced and dictated in open Court)
-
2010 (12) TMI 1165 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... msp;ADMIT. 4. The following substantial question of law arises for determination “Whether “contract carriage” manufactured according to specifications is “tourist vehicle” and whether services provided by the assessee under “contract carriage” makes assessee a “tour operator” under Section 65(115) of the Finance Act, 1944 (sic) (1994)?”
-
2010 (12) TMI 1149 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the part of the 2nd respondent to proceed and in these circumstances, it cannot be construed that there has been any command or intervention with the quasi judicial adjudication. 13. In view of the aforesaid, we do not perceive any of the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner merits consideration. However, we clarify that it is open to petitioner to file the reply to the show cause, if not already filed, within a period of six weeks elaborating the stand as clarified in this writ petition and, thereafter, the respondent’s authorities shall afford adequate opportunity of hearing and take a final decision. 14. Be it noted, Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, learned ASG has fairly agreed that till the adjudication is over and thereafter, for a further period of four weeks, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner including proceeding for attachment. 15. The writ petition and the application stand disposed of with no order as to costs.
-
2010 (12) TMI 1116 - CESTAT CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... 2010-TIOL-745-HC-MUM-ST 2010 (20) S.T.R. 577 (Bom.) 2010 (260) E.L.T. 369 (Bom.) . However, the Bench has held that credit of Service Tax would not be available to a manufacturer in cases where cost of food is borne by the workers. Learned counsel for the assessees states that some part of the cost of the food is borne by the worker. Therefore, in the light of the High Court decision cited supra, credit of Service Tax in such cases is not allowable to the manufacturers/assessees. The Service Tax demand requires to be re-quantified by working out the cost of goods borne by the workers and the amount arrived at accordingly. For this purpose, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal allowed by way of remand for passing of fresh orders after extending reasonable opportunity to the assessees of being heard in their defence. However, penalty on the assessees is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case and is set aside. (Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
-
2010 (12) TMI 1039 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Society received a recovery notice of demand - SCN was issued before assessment, but no reply was submitted by the appellant and thereafter, opportunities for personal hearing were also given to the appellant, but it did not avail the same and after assessment order was passed - appeal preferred was hopelessly barred by limitation and overall conduct of the appellant indicates that no case was made out so as to make interference and to condone delay, no ground to entertain the instant appeal and the same is hereby dismissed
-
2010 (12) TMI 997 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Validity of Section 154 as introduced by the Finance Act, 2003 - levying interest on the amount recoverable from the petitioners on account of the excise duty in terms of Section 154 - Exemption to the new industrial units from payment of central excise duty - petitioners have contested against recovery of interest as there was no wilful default on its part - Held that:- The benefits which the petitioners sought to be enforced by challenging the constitutional validity of Section 154 of the Finance Act, 2003 was on the basis of the pre-existing benefit or one flowing from a pre-existing right. The difference between a pre-existing right or benefit on one hand and the right or benefit, which is considered just and fair on the other hand is vital. The former falls within the jurisdiction of court while later does not. It cannot be spelt out from the decision of the Apex Court in M/s. R.C. Tobacco (2005 (9) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) that such a right or benefit has accrued to the petitioners as the specific question of the issue involved was confined not only to the constitutional validity of Section 154 of the Act, but also to all relevant circumstances and incidental questions centering around the issue. Hence the present relief prayed for by the petitioners must be deemed to have been denied, for what is claimed but not granted necessarily get denied in judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding. Writ dismissed.
-
2010 (12) TMI 980 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Pre-deposit - appellants availed outdoor catering service - CENVAT Credit denied - Held that:- As in the case of Ultratech Cements Ltd. (2010 (10) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) it was held that the assessee is entitled to CENVAT credit of the service tax paid on outdoor catering service if they have borne the entire burden of the tax without passing on any part of it to the ultimate consumers of food (employees of the factory). If, on verification, it is found that any part of the service tax paid on outdoor catering service was passed on to the employees of the factory, the entitlement of the manufacturer to CENVAT credit would stand restricted accordingly - set aside the orders of the lower authorities and allow these appeals by way of remand with a direction to the original authority to pass fresh orders in view of the Hon'ble High Court's judgment.
-
2010 (12) TMI 979 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Cenvat credit denied on LPG used by assessee in their canteen for providing meal to the workers and staff members - duty demand, interest and penalty - Held that:- In the case of M.M.R. Khan (1990 (2) TMI 267 - SUPREME COURT) held that providing canteen is an integral part of manufacturing activity of the assessee and as per the decision of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. (2009 (8) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT) is also any input which has gone into manufacturing of final product directly or indirectly is entitled for input credit, in this case also the respondent is entitled for the input credit on LPG which has gone to the canteen which is as per Factory Act is necessarily required to run their manufacturing activity, no infirmity with the impugned order and the same is upheld. Appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected.
-
2010 (12) TMI 978 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Clearing and forwarding agency service v/s business auxiliary services - Held that:- Perusal of the agreement and also the speaking order passed by the ld. first appellate authority, it is unable to find any reason to reverse the order of the first Appellate Authority who has not failed to examine the entire gamut of service provided by the respondent. Therefore he was correct to hold that the respondent had provided "business auxiliary service". revenue's appeal dismissed.
-
2010 (12) TMI 977 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD
Security services - appellant collecting service charge but not paying the service tax - actual amount received towards service tax had been suppressed - appellants produced evidence to show that they had received service amounts not only for providing security personnel but also providing labour for doing labour work & also submitted that even in the show-cause notice it was mentioned that the appellants have provided labour services apart from security services - Held that:- In the absence of agreements relating to the amounts payable and received and in the absence of supporting documents, mere submission of statement cannot be said to be sufficient. However since even the statement given by the appellant has not been got verified and even the show-cause notice also as mentioned above recognizes the fact that appellant was providing different types of services, this is a matter which is required to be verified since it has an implication in the quantum of service tax payable - order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original adjudicating authority who shall give an opportunity to the appellant to present their case once again and pass a well reasoned order.
-
2010 (12) TMI 943 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Commission paid by the appellant to the foreign service provider during the period 9.7.2004 to 10.1.2006 - whether will be taxable in absence of taxing provision which came later into Statute Book by Finance Act, 2006? - Held that:- Levy imposed was governed by section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 for the impugned period. no cogent evidence led by Revenue to prove their stand on facts to hold that the appellant should incur liability for a period not declared by law to be taxable. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any, as may be permissible in accordance with law
-
2010 (12) TMI 900 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery - GTA service eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 34/2004-S.T., dated 3-12-2004 - In the present appeal, the assessee submits that they are eligible for exemption inasmuch as the gross amount charged on each consignment of husk transported to the factory did not exceed Rs. 1500/- - CDR submits that exemption is admissible only where the gross amount charged on each consignment of husk transported did not exceed Rs. 750/-. condition was not satisfied and, therefore, the benefit of the Notification is not admissible to the appellant – Held that:- only goods transport agencies and not individual goods transport operators are covered by the aforesaid definition and, therefore, no service tax was leviable on the freight involved in transportation of goods by individual goods transport operators, issues is pending with the Hon’ble High Court, which means the issue is highly debatable. The admissibility of Notification No. 32/2004-S.T. is not in dispute, but this benefit was not allowed by the Commissioner. Therefore there will be waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of service tax, education cess and penalties
-
2010 (12) TMI 898 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI
Whether the services of business auxiliary service received by the respondent from the commission agents appointed abroad can be treated as their input service - service received by the respondent is of commission agent appointed by them abroad who secure the export orders from them - Held that:- service of commission agent is a service of the sale promotion and would be covered by the definition of ‘input service’. In any case, the activities relating to business are also covered by the definition of ‘input service’ and the service received from the agents for securing export orders would certainly cover by the term activity relating to business, there is no infirmity in the impugned order, stay application is dismissed.
-
2010 (12) TMI 824 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Service tax liability - collection of service tax liability of insurance premium from the policy holder - it is evident that once there is proposal and acceptance a valid contract has been created - Evidently, the first step is the proposal for insurance and the parties have agreed the terms and when the second respondent tendered the first premium, he has fulfilled his part of the contract and on acceptance the terms have become absolute and unqualified - Evidently, at that point of time the petitioner had not put any additional conditions for payment of any extra amount above Rs. 4,810/- to meet the service tax element. It is evident therefore that there had been consensus arrived at on the terms of the policy, as found in Ext.P7 award, to include every items within the Premium Amount of Rs. 4810/-. The Ombudsman was of the view that the premium was fixed as inclusive of tax and all the expenses. From the circumstances pointed out above, it cannot be said that the view taken therein is wrong. - Decided in favor of policy holder.
-
2010 (12) TMI 805 - CESTAT, BANGALORE
Waiver of pre-deposit - The demand under challenge is in relation to “maintenance or repair service” rendered by the appellant through a contractor to the State Government. Transformers belonging to the State Government were repaired in the said manner during the period of dispute - The appellant has taken a feeble contention to the effect that the repairs undertaken by them through contractor cannot be exigible to levy of service tax - After considering the definition of the service as amended from time to time, have not been able to accept the contention of the assessee - Decided against the assessee.
-
2010 (12) TMI 804 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Waiver of pre-deposit - Appellants states that the work undertaken by the appellants was as per a contract with the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and the said work falls under the category specified under Section 65(97a) of the Finance Act, 1994 but is eligible for exemption under the exclusion clause as it is in relation to irrigation, watershed development and drilling, digging, repairing, renovating or restoring of water sources or water bodies, namely, Sabarmati river - The appellants have made out a prima facie case for complete waiver for pre-deposit - Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2010 (12) TMI 786 - CESTAT, MUMBAI
Waiver of pre-deposit - Notification No. 12/2003-S.T., dated 20-6-2003 - The restriction as to admissibility of abatement with reference to non-availment of CENVAT credit applies to the service provider- M/s. IOCL is a recipient of the GTA service and discharged the service tax in terms of Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 - The assessee is entitled to the abatement denied to it as per the impugned order as per the decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot v. Sunhill Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. - (2007 -TMI - 3487 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD) - Decided against the assessee.
........
|
