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. Sampl Communication Pvt. Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise-New Delhi

2016 (3) TMI 202 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Cenvat Credit - Exempted service - Appellant contended that it had not provided any exempted service and by mistake that ₹ 94,953/- was shown in the column meant for exempted service in ST-3 return and this mistake happened because the accountant thought that as this amount had not been received from the service recipient but when subsequently received the tax was paid - Held that: In the absence of identification of the exempted service provided by the appellant and in the wake of the ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rder passed by the Additional Commissioner the order portion of which is reproduced below:- 1. I hereby confirm the service Tax amounting to ₹ 35,705/- (Rs. Thirty Five Thousand Seven Hundred and Five Only) and order recovery of the same from M/s. SAMPL Communications Pvt. Ltd. under Section 73 of the Finance act, 1994 as amended. 2. I hereby confirm the demand of Service Tax of ₹ 2,76,047/- (Rs. Two Lakh Seventy Six Thousand Forty Seven only) against wrongly utilized Cenvat Credit 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

aid and being the amount of Cenvat Credit wrongly utilized respectively from M/s. SAMPL Communications Pvt. Ltd. under Section 75 of the Act ibid from the due date till the date of its payment/reversal. 5. I hereby impose penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 on M/s. SAMPL Communications Pvt. Ltd. which shall not be less than two hundred rupees for every day during which the failure continues or at the rate of two per cent of amount of tax short paid, per month, whichever is higher, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sing penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 on M/s. SAMPL Communications Pvt. Ltd. as penalty has already been imposed on them under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. Ld. Advocate for the appellant has pleaded/contended as under:- (A) Short payment of ₹ 35,704/- is admitted. (B) The interest liability is also admitted. (C) Regarding demand of ₹ 276,047/-, the appellant has contended that this demand arises on the ground that the appellant provided the exempted servic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ccount of non-receipt of the same. The appellant stated that it duly submitted certificate from M/s. Indra Gandhi Employee State Insurance Hospital to that effect and that this amount was subsequently recovered and service tax paid therein. 3. Ld. DR on the other hand stated that that the very fact all this amount of ₹ 94,953/- was mentioned in the column for exempted service, establishes that the appellant provided exempted service and, therefore, utilization of CENVAT Credit in excess of .....

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