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. Abhijeet Infrastructure Limited Versus Commissioner of Service Tax Cell, Central Excise Head Quarters, Nagpur

2016 (5) TMI 136 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Refund claim - Amount of service tax paid in excess than the amount actually payable by them under Management & Repair Services - Held that:- if it is established that the gross receipt of service charges is lesser than the gross service charges on which service tax was paid then the excess paid service tax is prima facie refundable to the appellant. If the lower authority has any doubt about the accounting, calculation, the right course of action is that he should call the appellant in person 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

service tax etc. on verification, if the adjudicating authority finds that there is an excess payment of service tax, the same should be refunded in accordance with law. - Decided in favour of appellant by way of remand - Appeal No. ST/87413/2013 - A/87328/16/SMB - Dated:- 27-4-2016 - SHRI RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Petitioner : None For the Respondent : Shri B.Kumar Iyer, Supdt. (A.R.) ORDER PER : RAMESH NAIR The appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. PVR/154/NGP/2013 dt. 07 .....

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, Business Support Service etc. They had filed a refund claim on 7.6.2011 for ₹ 4,31,148/- an amount they contend to have paid in excess on 15.6.2010, than the amount actually payable by them, under Management & Repair Services. By the Order-in-Original the sanctioning authority rejected the claim. Aggrieved by the adjudication order, appellant filed an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) which has been rejected, therefore the appellant is before me. 3. None appeared on behalf 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

ly the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the said order which does not require any interference. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the appellant in their appeal memorandum and submissions made by the Ld. AR and perused the records. I find that the appellant have claimed the refund of an amount of service tax which according to their books of account was paid in excess. The appellant, have in the appeal memorandum submitted the calculation which is reproduced below: 4. Su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ails of revenue and other incomes are: Sales and Service Revenue: 1. Bhillai Sale of CI scraps Rs.350,730,000 2. Nagpur Operation and Maintenance Contract ₹ 47,821,000 3. Durgapur Contract Services ₹ 47,145,000 Gross Revenue Rs.445,696,000 Less Service Tax recovered Rs. -8,868,000 Net Revenue excluding taxes Rs.436,828,000 Other Income 1. Income from Commodity Trading ₹ 47,042,000 2. Interest and other misc Income ₹ 15,642,000 3. Commission Income ₹ 34,732,000 4. Co .....

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