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 →

Life Long India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi

2015 (5) TMI 1016 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Demand of Service tax - Reverse charge mechanism on import of Business Auxiliary Service - Held that:- as per the agreement between appellant and M/s Wainwright Industries Inc., sorting is defined as inspection for good/bad determination of part status. Thus, it is obviously a process by which it was determined whether a part was good or bad and in case of a bad part it was required to be reworked. The other components of the service including rework also clearly fall within the scope of Busines .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

be some reasonable basis for the purpose of best judgement assessment. However, not providing details in spite of repeated letters prima facie is an indication of suppression of facts. - Decided against appellant - ST/Stay/59824/2013 in ST/59175/2013-CU(DB) - Stay Order No. 51762/2015 - Dated:- 12-5-2015 - Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President Mr. R.K. Singh, Member (Technical) For the appellant: Shri Manish Gaur, Advocate For the respondent; Shri Amresh Jain, D.R. Per R.K. Singh: Stay application .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

for inspection, sorting, rework and liaison in respect of such goods. (ii) Sorting of goods does not amount of any processing. (iii) Best judgement assessment has been resorted to for the entire period except the years 2006-07 & 2007-08 by adopting an increase of 100% year on year without any basis. (iv) There was no suppression and therefore the demand beyond the period one year will be time-barred. 3. Ld. DR, on the other hand, states that: (1) the appellant never responded to a series 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

ions of both sides. We find that the appellant did not respond to several letters written by the Supdt., Range-I seeking details from it. It also did not submit any reply to the show cause notice although Revenue wrote two letters on 1.8.2012 and 17.8.2012 requesting it to submit its written submissions in response to the show cause notice. It also did not respond to the intimations for personal hearings granted vide letters dated 4.10.2012, 9.11.2012 and 14.12.2013. Thus, it is obvious that the .....

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