Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Shivam Exports, M/s. Mecshot Blasting Equipment (P) Ltd. And M/s. Shree Ram Industries Versus CCE Jaipur

2016 (2) TMI 259 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Refund - input services - duty paying documents - improper invoices not being in the proper form as per the provisions of Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rule 1994 as they did not contain complete details - Held that:- so long as the documents (debit notes) reveal the essential details like registration no service provided, service recipient, value of taxable service, refund cannot be rejected merely because the documents are debit notes.

Refund of service tax paid on THC Charges, REPO Cha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

which upheld rejection of refunds claimed under notification no. 41/2007-ST. The summary of the refunds rejected, period involved and grounds of rejection are summarized below: S. No. Appeal No. Name of the Appellate Amount Rejected Period of Rejection Grounds of Rejection 1 ST/784/2009 M/s. Shivam Exports, Jodhpur 63,069/- 01.10.2007 to 31.12.2007 1. Service not covered under Port Services. 2. Non Submission of proof of payment of service tax on GTA services. 3. Debit note not proper documents. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vice tax paid on services like THC, Manual documentation, business support services, business auxiliary services, Express release fees, BL charges and also GTA services on the strength of invoices which were held to be improper invoices not being in the proper form as per the provisions of Rule 4 A of the Service Tax Rule 1994 as they did not contain complete details. 3. The appellant has contended that: i) These services are covered under the port services / port charges as clarified by CBEC F. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

transport services on the ground that the proof of payment of service tax has not been submitted is untenable. It cited judgments in the cases of SRF Ltd. Vs. CCE Jaipur-I 2015-TIOL-2241-CESTAT-DEL, CST Ahmedabad Vs. Adani Enterprises Ltd. 2015 (37) STR 667 (Tri-Amhd.), and CCE Ahmedabad Vs. AIA Enterprises (P) Ltd.-2014 (36) STR 1236 (Guj) in its support. 3. Ld. DR while supporting impugned order referred to the judgment of CESTAT in the case of Rajasthan Textile Mills Vs. CCE Jaipur-2015(37) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ses, Business Auxiliary services, etc. availed in connection with the port services, it has been held by CESTAT in the case of SRF Ltd. (Supra) that refund under notification No. 41/2007-ST is admissible in respect thereof. The judgment of CESTAT in the case of Rajasthan Textile Mills (Supra) cited by the Ld. DR has been duly considered by CESTAT judgment in the case of SRF Ltd. (Supra). As regards, the transport charges, the High Court of Gujarat in the case of Adani Enterprises Ltd. (Supra) ob .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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