GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (6) TMI 445 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2016 (6) TMI 445 - CESTAT CHENNAI - TMI - Tax liability - Security service - Substantial reduction on reconciliation of accounts - Held that:- even the delay in receipt of payment advice may cause difference in determination of liability of the relevant taxing period. Therefore, it may not cause prejudice to the interest of Revenue, if the appellant gets an opportunity for reconciliation of its figures and satisfy the adjudicating authority for determination of proper tax liability. Accordingly, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

charged partially to that extent of liability is discharged, penalty may not be exigible. However, saying so, we do not prevail over the mind of the adjudicating authority since there is no estoppel against law and what that is law shall apply on the facts and circumstances of the case that may reach to his record. The appellant shall be heard on both facts and law and a reasoned and speaking order shall also be passed. Ld. Adjudicating authority has extended the concessional penalty of 25% of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

intained at Mumbai. Depending on the payment advice from different parts of the Country where service is provided, accounts is compiled in Mumbai and reconciliation of accounts could not be done expeditiously. During the impugned period, although the appellant was registered, returns were not filed. Ld. Adjudicating authority raised service tax demand of ₹ 52,54,860/-. However, tax liability shall be substantially reduced on reconciliation of accounts and that may be to the tune 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

efore, there should be a proper application of law and proper re-adjudication on such count. 3. Revenue says that the appellant availed opportunities to explain their case and adjudication order was passed on the figures submitted by them. Therefore, there is no need to send back the matter for reconciliation. So far as the penalty aspect is concerned, Revenue says that has properly been levied. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. 5. Ld. Counsel s submission deserves appreciation for th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

TMI - Advanced Search

Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

20-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

19-7-2017 IT

19-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 CGST Rate

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

More Circulars



|| 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