Case Laws |
Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax 2017 2017 2017 (12) Service Tax - 2017 (12) This
|
Advanced Search Options
Service Tax - Case Laws
Showing 201 to 204 of 204 Records
-
2017 (12) TMI 16 - CESTAT CHENNAI
Business Auxiliary Service - Revenue held a view that the appellants are facilitating the business of Insurance Companies/Financial Institutions to canvass their services by using the appellant's premises - liability of service tax - Held that: - the earlier arrangement of receiving part of the consideration from M/s. MUL was later changed and the appellants started receiving consideration directly from the companies. In any case, in the absence of justification recorded in the impugned order for upholding the invocation of extended period, we find no justification for the same.
While already paid tax dues are not contested by the appellants, we find they are right in contesting the penalty and also the invocation of extended period.
Appeal allowed in part.
-
2017 (12) TMI 15 - CESTAT CHENNAI
Business Auxiliary Services - case of appellant is that arrangement is on principal to principal basis for which they receive consideration - Held that: - the company whose accounts were verified by the appellant as part of sub-contracted work has no arrangement with the appellant. Further, even M/s. DHS have no arrangement with such company to enable the appellant to render any service on behalf of DHS - There is some element of confusion in the original authority's finding to identify the actual client itself. The appellants are providing service to M/s.DHS and DHS are their client. The company whose books are audited are not the client of the appellant. While they are clients of DHS and appellant did not render any service to the company on behalf of DHS.
Demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
-
2017 (12) TMI 14 - CESTAT CHENNAI
Business auxiliary services (BAS) - activity of intermediary between Bank and their prospective clients who required a loan for the purchase of a motor vehicle - Held that: - the issue stands covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Car World Autoline Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise [2016 (10) TMI 460 - CESTAT BANGALORE], where it was held that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of N/N. 25/2004 and eligible for both (d) as well as (e) Clause and they were not liable to pay service tax prior to 10.09.2004 - demand set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
-
2017 (12) TMI 13 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
Classification of services - whether hiring of the foreign vessels for transportation of petroleum product imported by the respondent, on time chatters basis, falls under the taxable category of “Supply of Tangible Goods for Use”? - Held that: - the issue is held in favor of the respondent by the Tribunal in the case of PETRONET LNG LTD Versus COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX [2013 (11) TMI 1011 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], holding that those transactions fall within the ambit of the exclusionary clause of Section 65 (105)(zzzzj) of the Finance Act, and are therefore, immune to the liability of service tax - however, In view of the fact that the order dated 24.10.2013 passed by this Tribunal in earlier occasion in respect of the same dispute in the case of the respondent has not been stayed or over-ruled, contrary view cannot be taken by the Tribunal in deciding the present appeal and the Principles decided therein can be adopted for deciding the issue in hand.
The transactions made by the respondent will not fall under the scope and ambit of “Supply of Tangible Goods for use” service - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
....
|
|