Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax 2011 2011 2011 (7) Service Tax - 2011 (7) 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 21 to 40 of 132 Records

• 2011 (7) TMI 948
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - Business Auxiliary Service - Held that: manufacture implies the change but every change is not manufacture. The ‘manufacture’ is excluded from definition of Business Auxiliary Services and the exclusion does not say that the final product should be excisable - Decided in favor of the assessee

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 947
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - Business Auxiliary Services - Held that: person who purchases and sells the goods on his own behalf and does not act on behalf of others is not commission agent - Decided in favor of the assessee

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 946
  

  Demand - Adjustment of excess duty - Rule 6(3) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 - Even though amended rules were not in force at the material time and therefore are not applicable to the case at hand, considering the spirit of the amended rules and the fact that the appellant is a public sector unit and the entire amount of tax has been paid by adjustment - Appeal is allowed

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 945
  

  Demand - The allegation against the appellant is that during the period of dispute, they have not paid service tax on the amount received by them from a main commission agent Shri Rajiv Sanghi, for whom the Appellant were functioning as a sub-agent - appellant is manufacturer of Steel Ingots and is also providing the service of procuring orders for sale of other party’s goods as a sub-agent of main agent Shri Rajiv Sanghi - It is not disputed that there is a circular issued by the Board according to which the sub-contractors do not require registration as service tax is to be paid by the main service provider - Appeal is allowed

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 944
  

  Rule 21 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 - Ex-parte order - whether the Respondent could take Cenvat credit of service tax paid in respect of input services received, on the basis of documents called ‘debit notes’ issued by service provider - Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - there is a clear finding in the impugned order that it is not disputed that document called ‘debit note’, contain the details like the name and registration number of the service provider, the nature of the service provided, service tax payable, service tax charged etc. or in other words all the details which are required to be mentioned in the invoice - Decided in favor of the assessee

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 943
  

  Demand - Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order held that the respondents are carrying out advanced research and development projects in the Maritime Transportation Sector, mainly to carryout research, related to ship design and production and other activities as a support to ship building - Held that: the respondents are carrying out advanced research and development projects in the Maritime Transportation Sector, mainly to carryout research related to ship design and production which is not under challenge - Appeal is dismissed

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 942
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - Time limitation - Revenue wants to add the value of free supply of material into the assessable value of service - the impugned order whereby the demand confirmed on the same issue, i.e., by adding the value of the free supplied material, to assessable value, the appeal is pending in the Tribunal and the Tribunal had already granted stay of the recovery and as applicants were under belief that on the same issue, stay has been granted for dues - The appeal is disposed of by way of remand

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 941
  

  Demand - Appellate Authority found that the Appellant had utilised the service of sugarcane transport contractors for transportation of sugarcane from various sugarcane collection centers and the service so received escaped levy of Service Tax - Consignment note may not necessarily be in any format since no such format is prescribed under law but the documents accompanying the goods identifying the consignor and consignee, route of consignment enable to construe what a consignment note is and the Appellant’s grievance that the consignment note was mandatory does not find support of law when fact and circumstances demonstrate route of goods moved disclosing identity of consignor and consignee and goods consigned - pre-deposit ordered.

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 940
  

  Demand - Business auxiliary service - Contention of Revenue is that in the impugned order there is a finding that there is a wilful suppression of fact with intent to evade payment of Service Tax - The very fact that the legislature has included Section 78 within the scope of Section 80 of Finance Act would imply that even in cases where suppression is involved the adjudicating authority can exercise power under Section 80 of the Act - the authority is duly empowered under section 80 to waive the penalty under Section 78 in case the assessee discloses sufficient cause for exercise of such power. The authority below on analysis of materials on records his held that though there was to some extent suppression of facts, the assessee had immediately cleared the tax liability upon being pointed out - Decided in favor of the assessee

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 939
  

  Demand - Rent-a-Cab Operator’s - Whether giving a cab on hire on demand basis for which the charges from the client are made on per K.M. basis are covered under the definition of ‘rent-a-cab operator service’ - Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CCE, Chandigarh v. Kuldeep Singh Gill (2010 -TMI - 77051 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT) held that in case a cab is given on hire to M/s. I.O.C. then the assessee is providing a taxable service - Decided against the assesse

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 938
  

  Demand - On account that the applicant is running an authorised service station - The contention of the applicant is that as per the definition of authorised service station, only service, repair, reconditioning of motor car, light motor vehicles or two wheelers are covered - As the light motor vehicle means any motor vehicle constructed or adapted to carry more than six passengers but not more than 12 passengers - Held that: Prima facie, the applicant is not covered under the definition of the light motor vehicle as per the Motor Vehicle Act - Appeal is allowed by way of remand to Commissioner (A)

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 937
  

  Waiver of amount of service tax of Rs. 17,38,176/- interest and penalty - The case of the applicant is that the erectioning, commissioning and installation of transformers are done by third party located outside India and as the applicant has not provided any taxable service, the demand is not sustainable - the applicant is manufacturing transformers and some of the transformers so manufactured are exported. The manufacturing and commissioning are different activities - Held that: as no part of service is performed in India hence the applicant has a strong case of waiver of pre-deposit of service tax, interest and penalty - Decided in favor of the assessee

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 930
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - GTA service - Circular No. 97/8/2007 dated 23.8.2007 - In this case Tribunal held that during the period prior to 19.4.2006 irrespective of whether a person provided taxable service and/or manufactured dutiable final products or did not provide any taxable service or manufactured any dutiable final products, he was required to pay the service tax on the GTA service received by them in cash, not through Cenvat credit - Held that: the issue raised by the Revenue requires re-consideration by the Commissioner (Appeals) afresh. Hence the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the Respondent

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 922
  

  CENVAT credit - Outward Freight charges - The department initiated proceedings against the appellant on the ground that the credit on service tax paid on outward freight for transportation of finished goods from 'place of removal' is not admissible - the period involved in this case is January, 05 to July, 07. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ABB Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore - (2009 -TMI - 34139 - CESTAT, BANGALORE) has held that the services availed by a manufacturer for outward transportation of final products from the place of removal shall be treated as input services in terms of Rule 2(l)(ii) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Appeal is allowed

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 909
  

  Cenvat credit - Input service distributor (ISD) - the credit in relation to the 5 invoices has been disallowed essentially on two grounds. Firstly, on the ground that the invoices were found issued in the name of Evergreem Autocomp India Pvt. Ltd. and secondly, on the ground that they were issued prior to the registration of the appellant company with the Excise Department. - held that:- Once it was clearly established that, apart from the fact that the company being the same was not in dispute and, that merely the name of M/s Evergreen Autocomp India Pvt. Ltd was changed to M/s Showa India (P) Ltd., the appellants herein, it was not permissible for the authorities to disallow.

  Regarding cenvat credit prior to registration - held that:- in order to enable the party to avail cenvat credit in relation to service tax paid on service inputs, obviously , a person has to get registered in terms of the provisions of the Finance Act read with Rules framed thereunder. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that the expression 'commencing of business' would apply from the time the party seeks to pay service tax and avail credit in respect thereof in terms of the provisions of law. The term 'commencing of business' in Rule 3 therefore, cannot be understood in the manner whereby it will apply only to the cases where the actual manufacturing process would start. It would commence from the time the preparation commences for the establishment of manufacturing unit as the party is entitled to avail credit even prior to actual commencement of production.

  Benefit of cenvat credit denied - decided against the assessee.

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 888
  

  Whether the activity carried out by the appellant is covered under the category of “Construction of Road” or Maintenance and Repair - Condonation of delay - whether the activity carried out by the appellant is covered under the category of “Construction of Road” or Maintenance and Repair - The respondent in para 2 stated that time for filing cross-objection expired on 12-10-2010 since notice for such filing was received on 28-10-2010 - condonation of delay was filed without any affidavit. Therefore, COD application is rejected.

  There is no cogent evidence to impeach findings of appellate authority. Learned D.R. relies on pages 27 & 28 of appeal folder for the proposition that Executive Engineer is not competent authority to issue the concerned certificate - Such as authority cannot be found to be incompetent to issue the certificate in question unless otherwise proved and evidence adduced by Revenue - Appeal is dismissed

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 887
  

  Import of services 0- Rule 2 (1) (d) (iv) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 - held that:- prior to 18-04-2006 when section 66A was introduced in Finance Act 1994, the provisions in Rule 2 (1) (d) (iv) did not have virus to tax the services rendered by a person located outside India in the hands of the person receiving such service in India. - Since the entire period involved in this dispute is prior to 18-04-2006, the Appeal succeeds on this count alone.

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 886
  

  Demand - Business Auxiliary Service - Circular No. 66/15/2003-ST dated 5.11.2003 - It is the argument of the Respondent that it had borne the incidence from the total amount paid by Asset Management companies and, therefore, there was no question of passing on the incidence of Service Tax - the assessee applied for refund and the issue of unjust enrichment was to be decided - Held that: this matter is no longer res integra and the Respondent is eligible for the refund claim and, therefore, we order that the refund amount should be paid to the Respondent forthwith - Appeal is rejected

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 849
  

  whether the manufacturer can take benefit of the CENVAT credit which it had obtained on the manufacturing side for discharging the Service Tax liability on account of Goods Transport Agency services rendered - Rule 3(4)(e) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - In the present case also, the Service Tax was paid out of the CENVAT credit on GTA services and hence, the Respondents were well within their right to utilise the CENVAT credit for the purpose of payment of Service Tax - Appeals are dismissed

  ---

• 2011 (7) TMI 847
  

  Demand - Suppression of facts and non payment of duty - It is seen that the assessee is a small scale civil works contractor who undertakes construction services of residential complexes to Tapadia Construction, Aurangabad with the building materials supplied by the builders - In the year 2007-08 he exceeded the limit and the turn over was Rs.15,07,000 - When this fact was pointed by the department, the said assessee co-operated with the department, provided all the information of the services rendered by him and also discharged the service tax duty liability - As soon as the provisions of law were explained, the assessee complied with the law - Decided in favor of the assessee

  ---

123456........ 7