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 →

Ahluwalia Construction Group Versus Commissioner of S.T., Delhi-I

2016 (5) TMI 681 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Waiver of pre-deposit - Tribunal passed order by setting aside only two contentions of appellant - Service tax demanded under the head Construction service was in contravention of circular dated 24th August, 2010 issued by CBEC clarifying that the ac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at in a similar appeal before this Court by a sister concern of the Appellant reported in [2015 (10) TMI 2484 - DELHI HIGH COURT] noted a similar contention of the Appellant and remanded the matter to the CESTAT for consideration of the Appellant’s 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

tay application filed by the Appellant before the CESTAT for a fresh decision in accordance with law. - Appeal disposed of - SERTA No. 2 of 2016 & C.M. No. 2032 of 2016 - Dated:- 20-1-2016 - S. Muralidhar and Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. Shri C. Hari Shankar, S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

stoms, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) requiring the Appellant to deposit ₹ 1.75 crores as pre-deposit and report compliance by 20th January, 2016. 2. At the outset, it is pointed out by Mr. C. Hari Shankar, learned .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd under the head construction service was in contravention of the circular dated 24th August, 2010 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs clarifying that the activity had to be treated as a works contract. It is pointed out that the above .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by the CESTAT. It is pointed out that a further contention raised, but not considered by the CESTAT, is that in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Kerala v. Larsen & Turbo Ltd. - 2 .....

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