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

2016 (1) TMI 627 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (1) TMI 627 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2015 (40) S.T.R. 198 (Tri. - Del.) - Mandatory pre-deposit (under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as amended with effect from 6-8-2014) - appellant had already remitted about 73% of the assessed demand as against the requirement of 7.5% - supply of tangible goods for use service - Held that:- The deposit by the assessee is however admittedly not for rendition of supply of tangible goods for use service but for Transportation of Passengers by Air .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

plea in the present application is mis-conceived as is the application. Misc. Application is rejected. The appellant shall deposit 7.5% of the assessed demand within two weeks from today, in default, the appeal shall stand rejected for failure of the mandatory pre-deposit. - Application No. ST/Misc./51176/2015 in Appeal No. ST/51788/2015-CU(DB) - Misc. Order No. MO/52165/2015-CU(DB) - Dated:- 30-6-2015 - G. Raghuram, President and Shri R.K. Singh, Member (T) Shri Anil Sood, Advocate, for the Ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed this appeal against the adjudication order dated 31-1-2015 passed by the Commissioner, Service Tax, Delhi. This order confirmed Service Tax demand of Rs. l,45,27,904/- apart from interest and penalties as specified therein, for the appellant having provided supply of tangible goods for use service, during the relevant period in issue. 3. In this application, the appellant asserts to have remitted ₹ 1,04,96,924/- as Service Tax under Transportation of Passengers by Air Service durin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in respect of the same taxable service confirmed to have been provided by the appellant, by the impugned order. If the Commissioner failed to appropriate the said amount, even so we would have considered such remittance as a deposit for the purpose of reckoning the mandatory deposit under the amended Section 35F, The deposit by the assessee is however admittedly not for rendition of supply of tangible goods for use service but for Transportation of Passengers by Air Service. 5. It is not wi .....

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