Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (8) TMI 397 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (8) TMI 397 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Denial of refund claim - Port services - Notification No. 41/2007-ST, dated 06.10.2007 - Held that:- in the schedule to Notification No. 41/2007-st, port services classified under Section 65 (105) (zn) ibid are mentioned. It implies that if the service provider has actually paid service tax under Section65 (105) (zn)ibid, the said notification exempts the same by way of refund if it is received by an exporter and used for export of goods. It is not ope .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

evedoring, loading, unloading, etc. provided in the port area as not falling under Port services. However, the said judgement no longer represents good law in the light of the CESTAT Larger Bench decision in the case of Western Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chennai [2011 (3) TMI 528 - CESTAT, CHENNAI (LB)] - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No.ST/448/2009-CU[DB], Appeal No.ST/534/2009-CU[DB] - Final Order Nos.52356-52357/2015 - Dated:- 17-7-2015 - Mr. G. Raghuram, President and Mr. R.K. Singh, Me .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ity sanctioned part of the refunds claimed. Out of the amounts of refunds rejected by the primary adjudicating authority, Commissioner (Appeals) allowed refund of service tax remitted under port service classified under Section 65(105)(zn) on the ground that port services under 65(105)(zn) of the Finance Act, 1994 are mentioned in the Schedule to the said Notification.The commissioner (Appeals) noted that although in the case of Velji P Sons vs CCE [2007(8)STR 236(Tri-Ahm)], it has been held tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s) was not legally correct in permitting the refund merely because those activities were wrongly classified by the service provider under Section 65 (105) (zn) ibid while paying service tax. 4. No one appeared on behalf of the respondent. 5. We have considered the contention of Revenue. We find that in the schedule to Notification No. 41/2007-st, port services classified under Section 65 (105) (zn) ibid are mentioned. It implies that if the service provider has actually paid service tax under Se .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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