Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Rajasthan Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. Versus CST, Delhi

2015 (10) TMI 2227 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Liability of Service Tax Period from October, 2005 to September, 2012 Tour Operator Service and GSA Service Appellant contends that it is not liable to pay tax on tour operator service and GSA Service does not fall under BAS and same have offices in India not abroad Revenue contends that liability under tour operator services arise and GSA Service falls under BAS and same were given abroad Held That:- It is not prudent that pre-deposit in respect of demand pertaining to tour operator s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

15 - Dated:- 24-9-2015 - Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President And Mr. R.K. Singh, Member (Technical) Shri Pawanshree Agarwal, Advocate And Shri Shafiq Khan, Advocate : For the Petitioner Shri Amresh Jain, DR : For the Respondent ORDER Per R.K. Singh: Stay application has been filed against the order-in-original No. 126-128/GB/2013 dated 11.9.2013 issued in respect of three show cause notices in terms of which service tax demand of ₹ 13,29,55,191/- for the period October 2005 to September 201 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

list on 20.4.2008, till then status quo as it exists today shall be maintained . This order was periodically extended up to 3.7.2008. On 5.8.2008 there is a Court master noting stating Hon ble Mr. Dalip Singh J. at request, list this case after four weeks . The appellant cited the judgement of Rajasthan High Court in the SB Civil writ petition No.1267/2009 to plead that because the case has not been taken up, the stay is deemed to have been extended/continued. The remaining demand (Rs.3,74,37,3 .....

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 declined. The appellant also contended that the GSAs in respect of which demand has been raised have offices in India and therefore reverse charge mechanism was not available. 3. Ld. DR, on the other hand, stated that after the denial of the appellants request by the CBEC it was clearly liable to pay service tax under tour operator service. As regards the demand under business auxiliary service there is no doubt that the GSAs were based abroad and clearly provided business auxiliary service i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tition 1267/2009 the Rajasthan High Court observed as under: It has been noticed that in these kind of matters, in the closing hours of the Court business, several of the requests come flooding in only for the purpose that the interim order be extended. This unnecessarily ritual is otherwise serving no purpose and rather keeps everybody on tenterhooks, be if the petitioners, or be if the respondents. In these kind of matters, in the opinion of this Court, for an event that the matter has simply .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version