Login | Register Now | Contact Us   
 

CGST Act IGST Act UTGST Act GST (Compensation to the States) Act Addendum to the GST Rate Schedule - 03.06.2017 101st Constitution Amendment Act, 2016 Addendum to the GST Rate Schedule - 18.05.2017 GST Compensation Cess Rates Decided in the GST Council Meeting held on 18.05.2017 Chapter Wise Rate wise GST Schedule - 03.06.2017 Chapter wise GST Rate Schedule for Goods Decided in the GST Council Meeting held on 18.05.2017 Revised Threshold for Composition Scheme - 11.06.2017 IGST Exemptions Approved by the GST Council - 11.06.2017 GST Rates Approved by the GST Council - 11.06.2017 Service Tax Exemptions in GST IGST Exemption, Concession List - 03.06.2017 Composition - Rules Valuation Rules ITC - Rules Invoice, Debit & Credit Notes - Rules Payment - Rules Refund - Rules Registration - Rules Return- Rules Transition Rules Proposed CTD Document Accounts and Record Rules GST rate Schedule for Services Decisions Taken by the GST Council in the 16th Meeting - 11.06.2017 List of Services under Reverse Charge Classification Scheme for Services Under GST
kosom ammar
STO 2011 Kar 1178
[Date of Order: 2011-07-14]

Service Tax: Waiver of penalty imposed under Section 76: Scope: They had filed the S.T.3 returns and that the delay was due to pending clarifications and there was no intention to evade payment of Service Tax. There was delay in payment of service tax and it is not disputed that the service tax and the interest have been deposited belatedly but the penalty amount was not deposited. The explanation offered by the respondent is that there was no intention to avoid payment of service tax and in fact for the period the service tax has been deducted and further in view of the information given by the NIIT of which the respondent is a franchise, claiming that they have made out a ground claiming exemption the said explanation has been accepted by the appellate authority and confirmed by the appellate authority in exercise of the powers under Section 80 of the Act for waiver of penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Act.(Para 6).

Revenue appeal dismissed.

Free Preview
STO 2011 Ker 1153
[Date of Order: 2011-07-04]

Service Tax: Whether the “terminal charges” collected from various Airline companies for the facilities provided in the Air Cargo Terminal attract service tax for “storage and warehousing” provided: Scope and liability: If appellant charges the same rates for the goods lifted after arrival in the terminal building after all processing and on completion of all formalities, i.e. within 48 hours, then there is no scope for levy of any service tax on the ground of storage and warehousing because appellant is not charging for the same. On the other hand if appellant charges more than the normal tariff of terminal charges on account of delay in lifting the goods within the cut off period of 48 hours, then such charges over the normal rates are certainly attributable for storage and safe custody of goods which squarely falls within the scope of Section 65(102) of the Act. Therefore, additional charges if any levied over standard rates for handling and clearance of goods within 48 hours can be treated as charges attributable to storage and warehousing and tax can be levied thereon. The matter is remanded for conducting enquiry and for levying service tax, if any payable on any part of the charges collected (Para 6).

Appeal dismissed.

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 1206
[Date of Order: 2011-07-01]
Free Preview
STO 2011 Guj 733
[Date of Order: 2011-06-30]

Service Tax: Services of Contractor for constructing the residential units for use of the members of the Housing Society: Taxable event: Demand: In the light of the clarification issued by the Board under Circular No. 108/2/009-S.T., dated 29-1-2009, viz., when it is only after the completion of the construction and full payment of the agreed sum that a sale deed is executed and only then, the ownership of the property gets transferred to the ultimate owner, in such a case, any service provided by such seller in connection with the construction of residential complex till the execution of such sale deed, would be in the nature of “self-service” and consequently, would not attract service tax.(Para 4). Society cannot be stated to be providing any services to the members. The contractor who undertakes the task of constructing the residential units on behalf of the society for the use of the members would be liable to pay service tax on such services rendered but in no case, society can be stated to have rendered any services to its members.(Para 5). No any question of law arises. Tax Appeal, is therefore, dismissed.(Para 10).

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 1125
[Date of Order: 2011-06-09]

Cenvat credit: Input service: Under the scheme of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the service tax paid on all those services which the assessee has utilized directly or indirectly in or in relation to the final product is entitled to claim the credit. 

Free Preview
CEO 2011 Kar 615
[Date of Order: 2011-06-03]
Free Preview
CEO 2011 P&H 577
[Date of Order: 2011-05-23]
Free Preview
CEO 2011 P&H 9
[Date of Order: 2011-05-23]
Free Preview
STO 2011 P&H 368
[Date of Order: 2011-05-13]

Service Tax: Erection, Commissioning and Installation: Penalty under Section 78: The Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that the assessee did not have the requisite mens rea to evade payment of service tax. The assessee had duly paid the service tax with interest and also made full and true disclosure in the return. The finding so recorded is not shown to be in any manner perverse.(Psara 5). No substantial question of law arises.(Para 6). The appeal is dismissed.(Para 7).

Free Preview
STO 2011 Guj 1193
[Date of Order: 2011-05-11]
Free Preview
STO 2011 Guj 288
[Date of Order: 2011-05-11]

Cenvat Credit: Security Provided to Employee Quarters: Input Service Not Eligible for Credit: The act of providing residential quarters by the manufacturer to its employees was voluntary. Providing further security service in such residential quarters was also an act voluntary in nature. Such activity cannot be termed within the scope of 'input service'. In the result, Revenue's appeal is allowed.

Free Preview
STO 2011 Guj 1182
[Date of Order: 2011-05-03]
Free Preview
STO 2011 Pat 1098
[Date of Order: 2011-04-29]

Free Preview
STO 2011 Guj 363
[Date of Order: 2011-04-28]

Service Tax : Import of Services - Liability of recipient prior to 18-4-2006 - Management Consultant Services received from foreign service provider - Department relying on Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 - Major shift introduced on 18-4-2006 for collection of Service tax - Bombay High Court in case of Indian National Shipowners Association STO 2009 Bom 78 relying on earlier decision of Apex Court in Laghu Udyog Bharati STO 1999 SC 7 held that in absence of any charging section, merely by virtue of Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) ibid recipient cannot be made liable - Charging section i.e. Section 66A of Finance Act, 1994 introduced w.e.f. 18-4-2006, demand prior to 18-4-2006, relying on Rule ibid wholly impermissible. [paras 9, 10, 17]

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 1093
[Date of Order: 2011-04-21]

Service Tax: Power of the authorities to impose penalties: Scope of Sections 76, 78 and 80 of the Finance Act, 1994: It cannot be said that there is any intention to avoid payment of tax by such taxpayers who bonafide believe that their activity is not liable to service tax. Probably keeping this in mind, the legislature has not only provided for imposing penalty, but also conferred a power coupled with discretion on the authority not to impose penalty. If there was a "reasonable cause" for the assessee not to pay tax. As the wordings of Sections 76 and 78 stand, unless, the ingredients mentioned in both the sections exist. those sections are not attracted. After those ingredients are held to be in existence and the sections are attracted, even then the imposition of penalty is not automatic.(Para 10). Therefore, (1) The imposition of penalty under the Act is not automatic. The ingredients mentioned in the Section should exist. In respect of Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Act, not only the ingredients of those Sections should exist, but also there should be absence of reasonable cause for the said failure. (2) Sections 76 and 78 are mutually exclusive. If penalty is payable under Section 78, Section 76 is not attracted. Therefore, no penalty can be imposed for the same failure under both the provisions.(3) Even if the ingredients stipulated in Sections 76 and 78 of the Act are established, if the assessee shows reasonable cause for such failure, then the authority has no power to impose penalty in view of Section 80 of the Act.(4) Even after holding that the ingredients stipulated in Sections 76 and 78 exist, and there is no reasonable cause shown for failure to comply with the said provisions, the authority has the discretion regarding the quantity of the penalty to be imposed. However, the penalty to be imposed cannot be less than the minimum, or more than the maximum prescribed under the statute.(5) The minimum penalty to be imposed is Rs.100/- and not Rs.100/- per day.(6) If the penalty imposed is not less than the minimum prescribed under law the revisional authority has no power to enhance the amount of penalty on the ground that it is less.(7) When the assessing authority, in its discretion has held that no penalty is leviable, by virtue of Section 80 of the Act, the revisionary authority cannot invoke its jurisdiction and impose penalty for the first time.(Para 33).

Power of the revisional authority to enhance penalties: The revisional authority in his revisional jurisdiction cannot enhance the penalty. It is settled law that if two views are possible, merely because the appellate authority or the revisional authority's view is not consistent with view taken by the original authority, that would not be a ground to interfere with an order passed by the lower authority. When the lower authority imposes a penalty, which is more than the minimum, the revisional authority has no jurisdiction in exercise of power under Section 84 to interfere with such power and enhance the penalty. Of course, when the penalty is more than, minimum, the aggrieved person would certainly challenge the order on the ground that the penalty imposed is on the higher side. Though it is more than the minimum and is less than the maximum the revisional authority certainly cannot interfere with the discretionary order passed by the assessing or adjudicating authority which has been vested with the power and discretion to impose such penalty.(Para 31).

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 1137
[Date of Order: 2011-04-20]

Appeal: Section 35G: Question for determination being relating to classification: High Court has no jurisdiction to decide the appeal. 

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 1177
[Date of Order: 2011-04-20]

Service Tax: Outdoor catering service during 1-4-2006 to 31-3-2007: Exemption under Notification No. 12/2003, dated 20-6-2003 in respect of the value of food and beverages served to the Airlines on payment of VAT: Whether the cost of goods supplied should be treated as sale of goods: Scope: The identical question with regard to the liability of the assessee towards service tax so far as service rendered by them with regard to the outdoor catering is concerned, came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal Nos. 671 to 726/2011 which were disposed off by the order dated 18-4-2011. Accordingly the outdoor catering contract is a contract for service by virtue of sub-clause (f) Clause 29A of Article 366 of the Constitution of India which has to be treated as composite contract and the State Legislature is competent to levy the sales tax on the sale aspect only namely, the value of the food articles. The Division Bench held that outdoor catering consists of goods namely, the articles of food etc., which would constitute sale. Hence, the value of the food articles are liable for sales tax which the State Government is liable to impose. The other part of outdoor catering is the service rendered by the assessee in bringing the food articles to a place designated by the client. The service so rendered by the assessee, which also includes the cost of transporting the food articles constitutes service. Therefore, to this extent alone, the assessee is liable for service tax and for the entire cost received from the Airlines.(Para 6,7)

Revenue appeal rejected.

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 1207
[Date of Order: 2011-04-19]
Free Preview
STO 2011 ALL 358
[Date of Order: 2011-04-15]

Service Tax: Condonation of delay in filing of the appeal : HELD: That the primary function of a court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and to advance substantial justice. Time limit fixed for approaching the court in different situations is not because on the expiry of such time a bad cause would transform into a good cause. In paragraph 12 of the report, it has been stated that rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the right of parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics, but seek their remedy promptly. The object of providing a legal remedy is to repair the damage caused by reason of legal injury. Law of limitation fixes a life-span for such legal remedy for the redress of the legal injury so suffered.(Para 13). In view of above, we hold that on the facts and circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals) should have condoned the delay and he was not justified in rejecting the appeal as barred by time.(Para 20).21. In the result, the appeal succeeds and is allowed and the matter is restored back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to hear and decide the appeal on merits.(Para 21).

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 1095
[Date of Order: 2011-04-13]

Service Tax: Service tax on the services received before 18-04-2006 from foreign company: Demand: It is clear that from 18-4-2006 the service provided by a person who is outside the country and who has no fixed establishment or permanent address in the country, such a taxable service shall be treated as if the recipient of service had himself provided the service in India and accordingly all the provisions of this Chapter shall apply. Therefore prior to 18-4-2006 the service tax was not payable by the recipient, in the event the service provider was outside or having no place of business within the country. Under these circumstances, the order passed by the appellate authority relying on the aforesaid Judgments of the Bombay High Court and Delhi High Court cannot be found fault with. Accordingly there are no merit in this appeal. Hence, it is dismissed.”(Para 4).

Free Preview
< Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next >
(DISCLAIMER: Despite all efforts have been made to reproduce the orders and other related contents correctly, there may still be chances for such errors and/ or omissions to have crept in inadvertently. The access and circulation is subject to the condition that Easy Service Tax Online Dot Com Private Limited is not responsible / liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any mistake / error / omissions.)
 
 

www.centralexciseonline.com

 


www.taxolegal.com


Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape


www.customsindiaonline.com
Home | Mission | Contact Us | Acknowledgements © 2009 Copyrights, All Rights Reserved. 
Disclaimer Though all efforts have been made to reproduce the order and other contents correctly, the access and circulation is subject to the condition that EASY SERVICETAXONLINE DOT COM PRIVATE LIMITED is not responsible/liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any mistake/error/omissions. Mr Certify site is constantly updated and any or all of the contents are liable to be modified, altered, deleted or replaced. EASY SERVICETAXONLINE DOT COM PRIVATE LIMITED is not responsible/liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone whether directly or indirectly  due to any modification , alteration, addition, deletion or replacement of any of the contents.

Copyright: Reproduction of news articles, photos, or any other content in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of  EASY SERVICETAXONLINE DOT COM PRIVATE LIMITED is prohibited.Do not copy contents of this site. All pages are protected by COPYSCAPE. Plagiarism will be detected by COPYSCAPE.