|
Advanced Search Options
Service Tax - Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 132 Records
-
2011 (7) TMI 492
Taxability of Telephone service provided through leased line (ACSR/copper wire) - held that:- In view of the fact that the leased lines provided through ACSR/copper wire provided voice communication, said leased circuits, in our considered view have been rightly held to be covered under the existing entry for telephone service even prior to the period 16-7-01. To that extent the tax demand is justified. The leased line provided through iron wire which is capable of only data communication cannot be brought under the ambit of the entry for telephone service prior to 16-7-01. Cum-tax value - held that:- the appellant will be entitled to assessment treating the value received as cum-tax value and therefore, the demand amount would have to be reduced subject to verification. Extended period of limitation - held that:- appellant has not shown their bona fide they have not reflected the actual service charges received by them towards the value of the taxable service in their statutory returns and further the Show Cause Notice clearly alleges that there has been suppression with intention to evade on their part and demand has also been raised u/s 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. The service tax law does not make a distinction between the private sector assessee and a public sector assessee and the provisions are equally applicable to both categories of assessees and the law makers have not made special provisions for one category.
-
2011 (7) TMI 485
Penalty - Under Rule 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - Disallowed total credit of Rs.21,360/- of service tax paid on (i) telephone service (ii) vehicle maintenance (iii) fixed telephones and (iv) courier agency -Held that telephone service having been used for sales promotion, this service is an eligible input service as it is a service used in connection with the activity of business of manufacture of final products - Since there is no bifurcation of the amounts denied in respect of four services, the duty demand has to be requantified after extending credit of service tax paid on telephone service, for which purpose remit the case to the adjudicating authority - Since credit is being extended in respect of tax paid on telephone service, penalty also is required to be requantified.
-
2011 (7) TMI 483
Waiver of pre-deposit - Exempted under Notification No. 10/2002-ST, dated 1-8-2002 - As per Show-Cause Notice, there is no ground for demanding service tax as provider, of cargo handling service as held by Commissioner (Appeals) - Held that cargo handling service is exempted in relation to agriculture service vide Notification No. 10/2002-ST, dated 1-8-2002 - Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2011 (7) TMI 479
Penalty - penalty cases of section 76 are covered by the overriding provision of section 80 of the Act. Burden to prove that there exists reasonable cause for invoking provision of section 80 of the Act - whether there exists reasonable cause to exonerate the appellant from levy of penalty, matter is remanded to the original authority and on all other aspects, adjudication is confirmed.
-
2011 (7) TMI 478
Cenvat credit - export of goods - manufacture of motor vehicles parts - The assessees replied to the notice stating that they had availed credit of service tax paid on clearing and forwarding services, fumigation services, courier services and goods transport agency services - The plea of the assessees that they had availed of two out of the services set out in the show-cause notice namely, clearing and forwarding services and fumigation services along with two other services and did not avail of port services has not been considered by the authorities below - therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit the case for fresh decision to consider the contentions of the assessees to the adjudicating authority.
-
2011 (7) TMI 471
Demand, interest and penalty - However, it is their contention that commission received even prior to 10.9.2004 has been included in the demand - It is their further contention that they are not liable to pay service tax on an amount of Rs.1,92,316/- paid towards road tax, insurance etc. under instructions of customers and reimbursed to them - Thus, the authorities below has considered this submission that even amounts of commission received prior to 10.9.2004 having been included in the demand - herefore, set aside the impugned order and remit the case for fresh decision to the adjudicating authority before whom all issues are left open for fresh decisin.
-
2011 (7) TMI 463
Waiver of predeposit - Rule 2(1)(ii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - outward transport the goods sold through depots/consignment agents or at customers promises - There is no dispute that the freight charges have been included in the value of the goods cleared from the factory premises of the appellants. We are of the considered view that the appellants have made out a prima-facie case for waiver of predeposit of the amounts involved - The application for waiver of predeposit of amounts involved is allowed and recovery thereof stayed during pendency of the appeal.
-
2011 (7) TMI 457
Utilization of cenvat credit - Appellant is not simply a provider of output service but also a manufacturer of the excisable goods - The appellant contended that till 28-2-2008 for the manufacture of final products the service of Goods Transport Agency remained an output service and, therefore, Cenvat Credit was permissible to be utilized for payment of service tax upto 28-2-2008 - As far as the period beyond 18-4-2006 is concerned, the Tribunal in the case of Alstom Ltd. v. CCE [2008 -TMI - 30469 - CESTAT, CHENNAI] held in that case that the credit cannot be utilized for paying service tax for this period as well - As such, as far as the period beyond 18-4-2006 is concerned, held that the appellant/respondent-assessees are not entitled to utilize Cenvat Credit for payment of service tax on GTA service and therefore, the duty demand and demand of interest are justified - Penalty dropped.
-
2011 (7) TMI 456
CENVAT Credit - Input services - Input services like Courier services, Clearing & Forwarding services, C.A. services, Maintenance and Repair services - The Tribunal in the case of Cadila Healthcare Ltd. Vs. CCE Ahmedabad (2009 -TMI - 75189 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD), has held that clearing and forwarding service as also courier service are eligible input services for the purpose of availing credit. As such, no merits are found in the above plea of the Revenue. Limitation - Since, the fact of taking credit was reflected by the assessee in their periodical returns - This fact is sufficient to reflect assessee bonafide - Fact of taking credit was reflected by the assessee in their periodical returns - This fact is sufficient to reflect upon their bonafide - As such, no infirmity can be found in the view of Commissioner(Appeals) holding the demand to be barred by limitation.
-
2011 (7) TMI 455
Input services - Cenvat credit - Customs House Agent and Clearing & Forwarding Agency - Rule 15 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - Revenue has raised all sorts of pleas to impress upon the fact that such services cannot be held as input service so as to allow availment of credit. Reference stand made to various decisions, which I find are not in respect of export of the goods - it is undisputed that the goods have been sold on FOB value to the foreign buyers and the possession of the same remains with the appellant till it reaches port of export - Appeal is rejected - Decided in favor of assessee.
-
2011 (7) TMI 443
Cenvat credit - service tax paid on house keeping services, rent a cab charges and courier service charges - There is no finding that the appellants had failed to produce any material in support of their claim or in relation to a link between the service tax and the manufacturing activity of the appellants - the fact that the Commissioner had failed to analyse the facts on record, and then to apply the law to those facts to ascertain whether the claim of the appellants is sustainable or not and consequently, because the Commissioner ignored the decisions of the Tribunal solely on the ground that those appeals have been challenged before the appellate authority, the impugned order to the extent it relates to the claim of credit in relation to the service tax on the said three services are concerned is not sustainable and is liable to be set aside to that extent and matter remanded to decide the said claim afresh in accordance with the provisions of law.
-
2011 (7) TMI 412
Cenvat credit - man power supply service availed for garden maintenance work on the ground - definition of input service as per CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - held that:- decision of the Tribunal in Brakes India Ltd. Vs CCE Mysore [2010 -TMI - 77209 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] holding that, the man power services used for garden maintenance is required as infrastructure for manufacture and clearance of final products is applicable - Cenvat Credit allowed.
-
2011 (7) TMI 407
Cenvat credit on input services - Security services - The contention of the assessees that some of their products are also stored in the marketing office and security services are necessary for this reason and is therefore an eligible input service - the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CCE, Nagpur Vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd. [2010 -TMI - 78203 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], held that credit is admissible for service tax paid on services in connection with the business of manufacture of final products - Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2011 (7) TMI 373
CENVAT credit - repair and maintenance of wind mills - The contention of the assessee is that the services in connection with maintenance of wind mills are exclusively used in relation to manufacturing activity and, therefore, are squarely covered under the definition of “input service” - As per the definition of input service it follows that the said definition not only covers services which are used directly or indirectly in or in relation to manufacture of final products and also includes other services, which have direct nexus or which are integrally connected in business of manufacture of final products - Decided in favor of the assessee
-
2011 (7) TMI 365
Penalties under section 76, section 77 - Amnesty Scheme - the assessee availed the benefit of Amnesty Scheme and paid duty and interest - A circular has been issued by the department where if has been made clear that if the assessee availed the benefit of Amnesty Scheme and the tax liability is determined, then he is not liable to pay any penalty - Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2011 (7) TMI 343
Penalties under Sections 76, 77 & 78 - Provisions of Section 80 - Distributor-cum-commission agent - The appellant was required to market the products, book the orders from customers based on which company would dispatch the products to the customers - For these services appellants were paid commission from time to time - Hence, it is a proprietorship firm and the nature of work is of such a nature that ladies do it on the basis of commission and they may not have big professional assistance or a proper office etc - Therefore, it is a fit case for waiver of penalties under Section 76, 77 & 78 of Finance Act, 1994 - Since the provisions of Section 80 are applicable to the present case and penalties have to be waived by applying the provisions of Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994 - Appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.
-
2011 (7) TMI 335
Penalties under Section 76 & Section 77 - service tax not paid on the amounts received - the appellants submits that appellant had not received the amounts but had only billed for the same and the submissions made by them that actually amount received was less has not been considered and reconciliation statement was produced by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) who did not consider the same since it was not before the original adjudicating authority - Therefore, the matter is required to be remanded to the original adjudicating authority for verification of the reconciliation statement produced before the Commissioner (Appeals) and also other documentary evidences etc. that may be available with the appellants - It would be appropriate to waive the requirement of pre-deposit of balance amount by accepting the offer made by the learned advocate to deposit Rs.25,000/- and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority.
-
2011 (7) TMI 312
Demand - Evasion of tax - Credit card facilitates - taxable entry provided by section 65(72)(zm) of the Act not only brought taxable services provided by banking company or a financial institution including a non-banking company to a customer to the tax net but also related banking and other financial services were brought to the scope of taxation using the term in relation to in that section of the Act - When Tax Administration noticed that different types of card facilities were provided by banking sector and other financial service sector to facilitate credit transactions, they considered proper to bring all such card facilities under one definition in clause (33a) of section 65 of the Act for taxing under the taxing entry in section 65 (105)(zzzw) of the Act enacting Finance Act, 2006 for convenience of tax administration - It is well settled that in matters of taxation laws, the court permits greater latitude to pick and chose objects and rates for taxation and has a wide discretion with regard there to. - levy of service tax justified. Extended period of limitation - The appellant although was registered with Service Tax Authorities from 18.07.2002, failed to prove its innocence nor could it establish that there was no suppression of fact disclosing in its return filed. - Extended period was rightly invoked by the SCN dated 31.10.2007 when the evasion came to notice of Revenue by investigation to make good of the loss to revenue. Bonafide of the appellant did not surface. Taxes due to exchequer remained unpaid. The appellant was liable for the contravention of law. Penal consequence of law has rightly followed.
-
2011 (7) TMI 308
Interest - Service tax paid on GTA services availed by them for inward transportation of goods by utilising cenvat credit - On the ground that the said services were not output services for the respondents, they were informed that service tax should be paid in cash - Accordingly, the respondents paid the service tax in cash and thereafter, proceedings were initiated for demand of interest on the ground that reversal of cenvat credit does not amount to payment of tax and since service tax was not paid by the due date, interest is payable - Since the respondents did not retain any money due to the Government and it was only a procedural irregularity - The Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara-I vs. Vulcan Gears - (2009 -TMI - 34739 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD), held that appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected.
-
2011 (7) TMI 300
Notification No.1/2006-CE dated 01.03.06 - Assessee providing service solely for rent-a-cab operator scheme service and availing the abatement of 90% instead of 60% -It is clear from their service tax return that they availed the abatement of 90% and it is very clear that they have wrongly availed 30% in excess of 60% as abatement - As per Notification No.1/2006-CE dated 01.03.06 the abatement is allowed only @ 60% - There is also no evidence to support the argument of the appellant that they have claimed abatement of 60% and not 90% - Decided against the assessee.
....
|
