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 →

U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. Versus Commr. of C. Ex. & S.T., Lucknow

2016 (5) TMI 611 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Service tax liability - Transport of goods by road received by the appellant for the period in question - Refusal of 75% abatement under the notification dated 1st July, 2006 as claimed - Appellant contended that the said notification even though was withdrawn on 1st March, 2008 yet the benefit of 75% abatement was available for the period in question which has been disallowed on the ground that the transporters did not give any declaration or certificate for providing such services and in the 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

nied. In other words, it should not be an automatic or mechanical levy and consequently no penalty could have been imposed.

Rejection of adjournment - Non-availibility of counsel - Tribunal proceeded without a proper opportunity of hearing - Held that:- it is not the case of the department that the appellant had indulged into any excessive adjournment or was deliberately trying to delay the hearing of the appeal. This was necessary to be observed as the Tribunal is the last court of f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mreshwar Pratap Sahi and Attau Rahman Masoodi, JJ. Shri Pradeep Agrawal, Counsel, for the Appellant. Shri Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Counsel, for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : N. Kumar, J.]. - This Excise Appeal questions the order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 6th July, 2015 whereby the Tribunal has upheld the orders of the adjudicating authority imposing service tax liability upon the appellant on transport of goods by road received by the appellant f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

did not give any declaration or certificate for providing such services and in the absence of such evidence the abatement could not have been claimed. 3. Sri. Pradeep Agrawal, learned counsel for the appellant corporation contends that firstly the liability was subject to the said abatement and secondly the nature of the declaration that was being sought was not justifiable as the appellant having discharged its burden, there was nothing to the contrary to deny exemption. 4. The subst .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

abatement of 75% under the notification dated 1st March, 2006 which is in effect an exemption ought to have been considered in accordance with the instructions issued by the department itself on 27th July, 2005. What had to be seen by the Tribunal was substantial compliance, and if the statute had been followed sufficiently, then in that event the benefit claimed should not have been denied. In other words, it should not be an automatic or mechanical levy and consequently no penalty could have .....

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