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 →

G.M.R Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Visakhapatnam-I

2016 (2) TMI 821 - CESTAT BANGALORE

Benefit of cenvat credit of service tax denied - service tax paid as consultancy fees to M/s. NABARD for preparation of the draft project report for maize processing and dairy units - denial of credit on the ground that the same cannot be considered to be covered by the definition of “input services” - invoking extended period of limitation - Held that:- Admittedly the service tax was paid by the assessee on the services obtained from NABARD in relation to preparation of draft project report for .....

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 by the definition of “input services”. The said phrase i.e. “activities relating to business” was the subject matter of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Pune-III [2009 (8) TMI 50 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] and it was held that the expression “business” is an integrated continuous activity and not confined or restricted to mere manufacture of product. Activities in relation to business can cover all activities relating to functioning of a busi .....

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 statutory records as also in the monthly returns. As such no malafide can be attributed to the appellant so as to invoke the longer period. Accordingly hold the demand is barred by limitation also. - Decided in favour of assessee - E/978/2009-SM - Final Order No. 21490 / 2015 - Dated:- 26-6-2015 - MRS. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Petitioner : Mr. G. Prabhakara Sastry, Consultant For the Respondent : Mr. Pakshi Rajan, AR ORDER PER: ARCHANA WADHWA The appellants have been denied th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ember 2005. 2. By way of issuance of show-cause notice dated 13.10.2008, the Revenue proposed to deny the credit on the ground that the same cannot be considered to be covered by the definition of input services . The said proposal stands confirmed by the orders passed by the lower authorities. 3. After hearing both the sides I find that admittedly the service tax was paid by the assessee on the services obtained from NABARD in relation to preparation of draft project report for maize processing .....

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