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 1133
[Date of Order: 2011-04-13]

Penalty: Mandap Keeper Service: Deliberate avoidance absent: Both the assessees are public authorities. The premises are given for social functions, public functions, cultural functions and political functions and on the basis of which, they cannot be said to be Mandap Keepers and they should not be construed as Mandap Keepers. However, the Tribunal on careful consideration of the relevant provision has come to the conclusion that both the assessees fall under the category of Mandap Keepers: Penalty set aside.

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 1205
[Date of Order: 2011-04-12]
Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 359
[Date of Order: 2011-04-12]

Service Tax: Appeal to High Court - Maintainability - Export of Services - Courier agency services delivering international consignments - Tribunal granted benefit of Export of Service Rules, 2005 holding that service derived outside India - Principal question arising, whether assessee liable to pay Service tax - Case squarely falling within phrase “determination of any question relating to rate of Service tax” - Apex Court only having exclusive jurisdiction - Appeal to High Court not maintainable - Sections 35G and 35L of Central Excise Act, 1944 as applicable to Service tax vide Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994. [paras 3, 4]

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 361
[Date of Order: 2011-04-12]

C.E.A. No. 54 of 2006, decided on 12-4-2011 Penalty - Non-payment of Service tax - Reasonable cause for non-payment - Assessee undertaking manufacture and also erecting and commissioning their finished products - Customer charged for services rendered as well as value of goods - Excise duty paid on whole value including that for services and liability under Service tax disputed till Tribunal - Tax paid after Tribunal order in favour of Revenue - No wilful attempt to evade - Commissioning, installation and erection work brought under tax net only from 1-7-2003 and tax claimed for period 1-7-2003 to 30-9-2003 - Period transitional and benefit of doubt to be given - Reasonable cause for non-payment in view of Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994 - No infirmity in Tribunal’s order setting aside penalty. [para 6]

Tax liability - Service tax liability when Central Excise duty paid - Assessee paying Excise duty on whole value including value of goods and that of services rendered - Contention that there cannot be levy of tax under two Parliamentary legislations - Excise duty levied on aspect of manufacture and Service tax levied on aspect of service rendered - Tax not paid twice. [para 6]
Appeal dismissed.

Free Preview
STO 2011 Mad 365
[Date of Order: 2011-04-12]

Service Tax : Tour Operator Services - Spare bus permit holders - Assessee’s contention that spare bus only a stage carriage and is covered by permit issued under Section 72(2)(xvii) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which is a vehicle kept for reserve to maintain operation - Department not considered specific issue though High Court had directed earlier to said effect - Department cannot ignore definition of “stage carriage”, “tourist vehicle” - Factual question as to whether reserve vehicle capable of being used as contract carriage, to be decided on case to case basis - Department while bringing petitioner under Tax net required to render specific finding as to how petitioner liable - Demand cannot be on surmises and conjectures - SCN bad in law as not taking into consideration purpot and intent of High Court directions - Petitions allowed with liberty to issue fresh SCN - Section 65(77) of Finance Act, 1994. - The respondent was required to consider the specific aspect as to whether the petitioners’ vehicles are covered under the definition of Tourist vehicle as defined under Section 2(43) of the Motor Vehicles Act, which states that a Tourist vehicle means a contract carriage construed or adopted and equipped or maintained in accordance with such specification as may be prescribed in this behalf and such prescription is contained in Rule 128 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. [paras 12, 14, 15, 17]

Demand - Tax liability - Department exercising power under fiscal statute while passing order bringing someone under tax net, required to render specific finding as to liability - Demand cannot be on surmises and conjectures - Section 73 of Finance Act, 1994. [para 12]

Writ petition - Maintainability - Alternative remedy - Impugned order questioned primarily on ground of violation of natural justice principles hence existence of alternate remedy not absolute bar for considering writ petitions - Petitions further admitted in 2001 and pending for 10 years, harsh presently to direct petitioners to avail alternative remedy - Article 226 of Constitution of India. [para 8]

Petition allowed.

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 1103
[Date of Order: 2011-04-11]

Service Tax: Cenvat credit on input services: Admissibility: If services tax is paid in respect of any of those services which forms part of the costs of the final products certainly the assessee would be entitled to the cenvat credit of the tax so paid.(Para 6). That apart, the definition of input services is an inclusive definition. What is contained in the definition is only illustrative in nature. Activities relating to business and any services rendered in connection there- with, would form part of the input services. The medical benefit extended to the employees, insurance policy to cover the risk of accidents to the vehicle as well as the person, certainly would be a part of the salary paid to the employees. Landscaping of factory or garden certainly would fall within the concept of modernization, renovation, repair, etc., of the office premises. It is to discharge a statutory obligation, when the employer spends money to maintain their factory premises in an eco-friendly, manner, certainly, the tax paid on such services would form part of the costs of the final products. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the substantial questions of law framed in this appeal are answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The appeal is dismissed.(Para 7).

Free Preview
CEO 2011 Kar 555
[Date of Order: 2011-04-11]
Free Preview
CEO 2011 Kar 515
[Date of Order: 2011-04-08]
Free Preview
CIO 2011 Kar 241
[Date of Order: 2011-04-08]
Free Preview
STO 2011 Jhar 366
[Date of Order: 2011-04-08]

Service Tax : Cargo Handling Services: Handling goods within factory premises - Shifting of unfinished and finished goods in factory premises of another - Cargo handling service means loading, unloading, packing or unpacking of cargo - Cargo, according to dictionary meaning, is loaded or unloaded on truck, aircraft and ship - Definition in Section 65(23) of Finance Act, 1994 not covers handling of goods within factory premises - Revenue’s appeal dismissed. [paras 3, 4]

Appeal dismissed.

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 1174
[Date of Order: 2011-04-08]

Service Tax: Distribution of Service tax credit made in one unit and availed of in another unit: Availability and scope: The assessee had availed the Service tax credit based on the invoices issued by the Chennai office indicating that the Service tax are taken by their unit at Malur. That the Service tax paid by the Chennai unit pertains to advertisement of their product ‘Sabena Dish Wash Bar’ which was manufactured by their Cuttack Unit and not by the unit at Malur. Therefore, the assessee was dealing with the very same product. Rule 7 of the Cenvat Credit Rules governs procedure/manner of distribution of credit by input service distributor by imposing two conditions therein, which are as follows :

“a. Credit distributed under the invoice of ISD does not exceed the amount of Service tax paid.

b. Credit of Service exclusively used for exempted goods or exempt service is not distributed.

Therefore, the assessee is entitled to distribute the Cenvat credit on the input services on its manufacturing unit or other units providing the output services. The view taken in the order in appeal that the distribution of credit is for the advertisement of the product, which is not at all manufactured at Malur Unit, therefore, cannot be accepted. The finding that the assessee is entitled to take credit only in the unit where the product is manufactured is therefore not the mandate of Rule 7 of the Cenvat Credit Rules.(Para 4,5).

Revenue appeal dismissed.

Free Preview
STO 2011 Kar 817
[Date of Order: 2011-04-08]

Cenvat Credit: 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
STO 2011 P&H 1124
[Date of Order: 2011-04-07]

Cenvat credit: Service tax paid as service receiver on GTA: Credit admissible as input service. 

Free Preview
STO 2011 P&H 376
[Date of Order: 2011-04-06]

Service Tax: Question of law- Whether the Commissioner can pass Order-In-Revision under Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994, on an issue when the appeal decided by the Commissioner (Appeal) is entirely on different issue?: HELD: A perusal of Section 84 of the Finance Act,1994 shows that if any issue is pending in appeal, the revisional jurisdiction could not be exercised. No doubt in the appeal of the assessee, the issue was only validity of order-in-original, by virtue of Section 35A(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the Commissioner (Appeals) could also go into the question of higher liability of the assessee.(Para 5). Thus, exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Section 84(4) of the Finance Act, 1994 when appeal had been preferred was not permissible. The view taken by the Tribunal is consistent with above statutory provision. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed.(Para 7,8).

Free Preview
CIO 2011 Guj 228
[Date of Order: 2011-04-06]
Free Preview
CEO 2011 Kar 557
[Date of Order: 2011-04-05]
Free Preview
CEO 2011 Kar 583
[Date of Order: 2011-04-05]
Free Preview
CEO 2011 Kar 8
[Date of Order: 2011-04-01]
Free Preview
CEO 2011 Del 554
[Date of Order: 2011-03-30]
Free Preview
CEO 2011 Del 588
[Date of Order: 2011-03-29]
Free Preview
< Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 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.