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

2016 (2) TMI 315 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (2) TMI 315 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Wavier of pre-deposit - Demand of service tax on advance received as per the balance sheet - Rate of composition tax on works contract - The appellant has contended that (i) It opted for Composition scheme for Works Contract Services when the rate of tax was 2%, and therefore the same rate should continue for the entire period of the contract - Held that:- While the demands under Show cause dated 21/10/2012 and 19/10/2012 are prima facie not barred by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ie case is not favor of assessee - Stay granted partly. - Service Tax Stay Application No. 61540/2013 And 50461/2014 of Service Tax Appeal No. ST/60458/2013 And 50357/2014 - Dated:- 22-12-2015 - G Raghuram, President And R K Singh, Member (T) For the Appellant : Shri P K Sahu, Adv For the Respondent Rep by: Shri Rajeev Gupta, DR ORDER Per R K Singh Stay applications along with appeals have been filed in respect of Commissioner's Order confirming the following demands under Works Contract ser .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t as was held by Commissioner (Appeals) in the appellant's own case vide order no. 73/ST/DLH/2011 dated 9/3/2011 (ii) No service tax was payable as on works contracts before 1.6.2007 as has been held by Supreme Court in the case of Larsen & Tourbo Ltd. & Ans. - 2015-TIOL-187-SC-ST (iii) The demand has been inflated by an amount of ₹ 29.68 crores as the advances received and shown in the balance sheet were adjusted in the amounts received for rendition of service, (iv) In view o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

actors, the impugned demand would reduce to about 18.55 crores out of an amount of ₹ 15.77 crores has been paid. 3. Ld. DR on the other hand contented that (i) the order-in-appeal referred to by the appellant rejected its refund claim which means that the said order-in-appeal had a typographical error with regard to the applicability of 2% rate under composition scheme for the entire period of contract. (ii) The demand for the period 2008-2009 under show cause notice dated 21/12/2009 is 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