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 →

Bharath Auto Cars Pvt Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax Mangalore

2016 (1) TMI 68 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Refund of service tax - period of limitation - whether protest is required to submitted at every time of making payment of service tax - Held that:- there was a continuing deemed protest by the appellant for the service tax paid for the subject services namely authorized free services for the automobiles sold under warranty and the charges for the said warranty of services had been taken from the customers at the time of sale/purchase of the vehicles and on which amount sales tax/VAT had been pa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

- ST/508/2012-SM - Dated:- 20-10-2015 - Ashok K Arya, Member (T) For the Appellant : Mr Rajesh Kumar, CA For the Respondent : Mr Pakshi Rajan, AR ORDER Per Ashok K Arya Both the parties have been heard. 2. The issue here is non-sanction of refund totalling to ₹ 2,02,445/- for the period of July 2007 to November 2008 mainly on the ground that appellant did not make payments of this amount of service tax under protest; when the appellant did not pay under protest, the refund claim filed aft .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the same issue for the future period of December 2008 to August 2009. He says that the said refund which is for the period of July 2007 to November 2008 is the middle period for which there was no need to file any express protest, as the payment of service tax for the same service is continuing and every time and again they need not file their express protest. 3.1 The learned advocate for the appellant cites the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd Vs .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Explanation appended to sub-section (1) of Section 11B to mean the date of payment of duty in cases other than those falling under Clauses (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) of the said Explanation. It is submitted that Clauses (a) to (e) deal with certain specific situations whereas the one applicable in most cases is the date of payment. It is submitted that the appellate/revision proceedings, or for that matter proceedings in High Court/Supreme Court, take a number of years and by the time the claima .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

liability by way of appeal, revision or in the higher courts, he would naturally pay the duty, whenever he does, under protest. It is difficult to imagine that a manufacturer would pay the duty without protest even when he contests the levy of duty, its rate, classification or any other aspect. If one reads the second proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11B along with the definition of "relevant date", there is no room for any apprehension of the kind expressed by the learned Counse .....

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