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 2014 Guj 961
[Date of Order: 2013-02-13]
Free Preview
CEO 2013 Guj 167
[Date of Order: 2013-01-24]
Free Preview
STO 2013 Del 1690
[Date of Order: 2013-01-23]
Free Preview
STO 2013 Mad 2
[Date of Order: 2013-01-21]

Recovery: Appeal along with stay application pending before CESTAT: Coercive action taken in view of Board’s Circular dated 1.1.2013: Recovery stayed till next date of hearing.

Free Preview
STO 2013 Bom 3
[Date of Order: 2013-01-17]

Coercive steps: Recovery: Recovery stayed till the next date of hearing.

Free Preview
STO 2013 Del 1635
[Date of Order: 2013-01-14]

Service Tax: Services provided prior to 14-5-2003 but, in respect of which payments were received on or after 14-5-2003, whether service tax was chargeable @ 5% or @ 8%: Scope and liability: Rule 5B of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 came into effect on 1-4-2011 and was out of the statute books on 1-7-2012. Section 67A of the Finance Act, 1994, was inserted in the said Act by virtue of the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 28-5-2012. In the present case, the relevant period is April, 2003 to September, 2003. Therefore, none of the above provisions apply. Moreover, even Rule 4(a)(i) of the Point of Taxation Rules 2011 is not applicable because those Rules came into effect on 1-3-2011.

In the absence of any Rules, it is to examine as to what is the taxable event. The taxable event as per the Finance Act, 1994 is the providing of the taxable service. In the present case, not only were the services admittedly provided prior of 14-5-2003 but also the bills have been raised prior to 14-5-2003. The only thing that happened after 14-5-2003 was that the payments were received after that date. That, would not change the date on which the taxable event had taken place. Since the taxable event in the present case took place prior to 14-5-2003, the rate of tax applicable prior to that date would be the one that would apply. In the present case, the rate of 5% would be applicable and not the rate of 8%.(Para 5,6).

Revenue appeal dismissed.

Free Preview
STO 2013 Mad 1668
[Date of Order: 2013-01-11]
Free Preview
STO 2013 AP 1
[Date of Order: 2013-01-09]

Board's Circular Circular No. 967/01/2013-CX dated 01-01-2013 Stayed by High Court There shall be interim stay of recovery of the amount involved, till the appellate authority disposes of the application for stay.

Free Preview
STO 2012 Chha 1218
[Date of Order: 2012-12-13]
Free Preview
STO 2012 Guj 1214
[Date of Order: 2012-12-06]
Free Preview
CEO 2012 Bom 88
[Date of Order: 2012-12-05]
Free Preview
STO 2012 Del 1148
[Date of Order: 2012-11-30]

Consulting Engineering Service: Rule 5 of Valuation Rules: Validity challenged: By including the expenditure and costs, Rule 5(1) goes far beyond the charging provisions and cannot be upheld.

Free Preview
CEO 2012 AP 98
[Date of Order: 2012-11-27]
Free Preview
STO 2012 Del 1164
[Date of Order: 2012-11-08]

Service Tax: Payment of service tax on goods transport agency by adjustment of Cenvat credit instead of payment in cash : Scope and admissibility: Taking note of the provisions of Section 68(2) as well as the decision of the Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. STO 2007 CESTAT 151 and RRD Tex Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Salem, STO 2007 CESTAT 427 held that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of claiming payment of service tax on GTA services through adjustment of Cenvat credit. The appeal preferred by the Revenue to the CESTAT was rejected following the previous order in Nahar Industrial Enterprises; it also noticed other decisions on the same subject i.e. India Cements v. CCE, Salem, STO 2007 CESTAT 579; Bhushan Power & Steel Ltd. v. CCE; STO 2007 CESTAT 1049, and CCE, Nagpur v. Visaka Industries Ltd,STO 2007 CESTAT 184. Revenue had challenged the CESTAT’s order in Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. (supra) before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The High Court by its order reported as CCE v. Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd.,STO 2010 P&H 853 held as follows :- Learned counsel for the revenue has contended that the respondents cannot pay the service tax from the Cenvat credit availed by them. But this argument has no force, because a perusal of para 2.4.2 of CBEC’s Excise Manual of Supplementary Instructions shows that there is no legal bar to the utilisation of Cenvat credit for the purpose of payment of service tax on the GTA services. Apart from the above, even as per Rule 3(4)(e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the Cenvat credit may be utilized for payment of service tax on any output service.(Para 4,6).

Appeal dismissed.

Free Preview
STO 2012 Ker 1191
[Date of Order: 2012-10-19]

Service Tax: Chitty business and C.B.E.C. Circular No. 96/7/2007-S.T., dated 23-8-2007: Validity for levy of service tax: Whether Service Tax can be sought to be imposed by way of Circular issued for the first time, invoking the power under Section 37B of the Central Excise Act, 1984 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994: Scope and liability: It is quite appropriate to refer to some of the provisions of the Statute, particularly Section 65(12) which defines the term “Banking and other financial services” and Section 65(105) which deals with the “taxable services” with specific reference to sub-clause (zm). There occurred an amendment to the Finance Act, 1994 in the year 2007, whereby the words “but does not include cash management” as it appeared in Section 65(12)(a)(v) came to be deleted. By deletion of the above words, the petitioners could be brought within the purview of tax net by the Statute itself. The provisions in a ‘taxation Statute’ have to be interpreted strictly, as made clear by the Apex Court. But when ”all sorts of fund management” were sought to be taxed, giving exception only to ‘cash management’ under the unamended provision and when it came to be excluded after the amendment to Section 65(12)(a)(v) in the year 2007, this Court finds that, each and every instance of ‘fund management’ need not be separately mentioned in the provision, to attract the tax liability. Even as per the unamended Statute, when the exception was only to a limited extent i.e., in respect of ‘cash management’, the deletion of the exception has revived “all forms of fund management” with full vigour and vitality, which cannot be watered down. To put in other words, the term “all forms of fund management” forms the genus, of which, ‘cash management’ is one of the species. The exception given to the specie (cash management) is taken away by deleting the same in the year 2007, after which, all forms of fund management become taxable. It has to be noted that, there is absolutely no challenge against the statutory provision i.e., in respect of the amendment brought about in the year 2007 and this being the position, the tax liability stands governed, not by virtue of the Circular, but by virtue of the amended provision. The idea and understanding of the petitioners to the contrary, is quite wrong and misconceived.(Para 13, 15, 29).

The scope of interference especially with regard to taxing laws has been explained by another Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in Federation of Hotel & Restaurant v. Union of India - 1989 KHC 957 = (1989) 3 SCC 634 = AIR 1990 SC 1637 = 1989 (178) ITR 97 = 1989 (74) STC 102 more particularly in paragraphs 46, 47 and 48. In Karnataka Bank Ltd. v. Stale of Andhra Pradesh and Others - 2008 KHC 4140 = (2008) 2 SCC 254 = 2008 (1) SCALE 660, it has been held that, any interpretation which renders a legislation unconstitutional, is to be avoided. In the above facts and circumstances, this Court finds it difficult to agree with the proposition mooted by the petitioners in these writ petitions and disagrees with the view expressed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in 2009 (13) S.T.R. 350 (A.P.)(Para 39,40)

Petitions dismissed.

Free Preview
CEO 2012 Guj 62
[Date of Order: 2012-10-18]

Cenvat credit: Input Service: Nexus with the service: commission agent is directly concerned with the sales rather than sales promotion and as such the services provided by such commission agent would not fall within the purview of the main or inclusive part of the definition of input service.

Free Preview
STO 2012 Guj 1138
[Date of Order: 2012-10-18]

Whether services namely Technical Testing and Analysis Service: Technical Testing and Certification Service, Business Auxiliary Service (Service rendered by the Commission agent), Service rendered by clearing and Forwarding Agent, Courier Service, Commercial and Industrial Construction Service, Maintenance or Repair service, Interior Decorator Service, Management Consultancy Service, availed by the petitioner, as eligible services for availing input service credit as defined under Rule 2(l) of the CCR, 2004services rendered by a technical inspection and certification agency fall under sub-clause (zzi) of clause (105) of section 65 of the Finance Act which is one of the clauses specified under sub-rule (5) of rule 6 of the Rules.

Free Preview
CEO 2012 Guj 121
[Date of Order: 2012-10-10]
Free Preview
STO 2012 HP 1160
[Date of Order: 2012-10-04]
Free Preview
STO 2012 Del 1202
[Date of Order: 2012-10-03]
Free Preview
Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 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.)




Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape

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.