Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The Commissioner Ranipet Municipality Railway Station Road Ranipet Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise Chennai III Commissionerate, The Additional Commissioner of Central Excise Chennai III Commissionerate, The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Ranipet Division And The State Bank of India Ranipet Branch

Seizure of bank account - Default of payment of service tax - petitioners did not register themselves with the service tax department for rendering various service to the consumers and collecting fee - Held that:- to realize the service tax amount due and payable by the petitioners, the respective respondent had issued instructions to the respective bank where the petitioner is maintaining their account. Pursuant to such order to freeze the bank account, the service tax amount due and payable by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

J. For the Appellant : Mr.G.Natarajan For the Respondents : Mr.T.Chandrasekaran COMMON ORDER Petitioners have come forward with the aforesaid prayer. 2. The Commissioners of respective Municipalities have come forward with these writ petitions praying to quash the notices issued by the third respondent wherein and by which the bank account of the respective municipality have been ordered to be freezed for non-payment of service tax due and payable by them. 3. The petitioners-Municipality are in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

partment for rendering various service to the consumers and collecting fee in the form of parking fees, market fees, bus fees, pay and use toilets, slaughter house charges etc., to the consumers within their jurisdiction. The petitioners have submitted their reply stating that they are not aware of the service tax liabilities under the Finance Act and hence, they did not collect service tax from the licencees and/or lessees/contractors. It is further stated that when they resorted to collect the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iled appeals before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Chennai together with an application for interim stay. 4. In this context, it is necessary to cull out the details of the show cause notice, reply given by the petitioner and the order passed by the respective respondent, the details of which are given below:- W.P.No. 5452 of 2015 was filed by the Commissioner of Ranipet Municipality. The Second respondent issued a show cause notice dated 03.10.2012 and another show cause notice da .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oner's bank account was ordered to be freezed, which resulted in the petitioner filing this writ petition. Similarly, in the case of the petitioner in WP No. 5453 of 2015 namely Commissioner of Krishnagiri Municipality, a show cause notice dated 03.10.2012 and 19.10.2012 were issued by the second respondent for which a reply was sent by them. Thereafter, an order dated 31.07.2013 was passed by the second respondent confirming the levy. On receipt of the final order dated 31.07.2013, the peti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

count was ordered to be freezed, which resulted in the petitioner filing this writ petition. WP No. 5667 of 2015 was filed by The Commissioner, Arakonam Municipality contending that on 22.10.2012 and 19.04.2013, the second respondent issued a show cause notice proposing to demand service tax, for which a reply was given by the petitioner. Notwithstanding such reply, the second respondent confirmed the levy by an order dated 25.07.2013. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a letter dated 26.02.2015 pu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t was ordered to be freezed, which resulted in the petitioner filing this writ petition. WP No. 5668 of 2015 was filed by The Commissioner, Walajah Municipality. In this case, show cause notices dated 22.10.2012 and 15.07.2013 were issued by the second respondent. Thereafter, a personal hearing was given to the petitioner municipality during which the Junior Assistant, Walajah Municipality appeared and submitted a written explanation. Notwithstanding such explanation, the second respondent confi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

13 were issued by the second respondent and after getting a reply from the petitioner, orders dated 25.07.2013 and 02.01.2014 were issued against the petitioner confirming the levy. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a letter dated 26.02.2015 purportedly under Section 74 of the Finance Act requesting to rectify certain mistake, which according to them are apparent on the face of record. The said petition for rectification was pending. Pending the petition for rectification, the petitioner's ban .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Chennai. The said appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal holding that it is not maintainable and liberty was given to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the competent authority. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a letter dated 27.02.2015 to the second respondent purportedly under Section 74 of the Finance Act requesting to rectify certain mistake, which according to them are apparent on the face of record. The said .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

econd respondent confirming the levy. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed an appeal in NO.10/2014 before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai and the said appeal is pending. Pending the appeal, the petitioner's bank account was ordered to be freezed, which resulted in the petitioner filing this writ petition. 5. Admittedly, to realize the service tax amount due and payable by the petitioners, the respective respondent had issued instructions to the respective bank whe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Updates     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version