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 →

Bharat Hotels Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi

2016 (1) TMI 627 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

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 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

effect from 6-8-2014 invites a mere administrative process, of ascertaining whether pre-deposit as stipulated was made at the time of filing the appeal or whether remittance of any Service Tax/penalty even prior to the institution of the appeal is fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sc. 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 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ice G. Raghuram, President]. - This application is filed by the appellant for a determination that since it had already remitted about 73% of the assessed demand as against the requirement of 7.5% mandatory pre-deposit (under Section 35F of the Centr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

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 pe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

924/- made by the appellant under Transportation of Passengers by Air Service should have been appropriated (in the impugned order) against the confirmed demand of Service Tax on rendition of supply of tangible goods for use service. 4. If the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he 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 deposi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ance with the mandatory deposit mandated by Section 35F of the 1944 Act), to assess even prima facie, whether the classification of the service in the impugned order is correct and whether Service Tax remitted by an assessee under a different categor .....

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