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 2009 SC 1713
[Date of Order: 2009-04-23]

Service Tax: Photography services: Taxable value – Deductions: Tribunal in the impugned orders held that as per notification, departmental clarification and Tribunal decisions, in the services relating to photography, if certain goods and materials are consumed, then the value of those goods and materials cannot be included in the value of the services for levy of Service tax.

C.A dismissed.

Free Preview
CEO 2009 SC 30
[Date of Order: 2009-04-13]
Free Preview
STO 2009 SC 1729
[Date of Order: 2009-04-02]

Service Tax: Advertising agency: Scope and liability: Appellant is given final opportunity to produce all the relevant records particularly to show the nature of the work which the appellant specifically undertakes. Accordingly, the matter stands remitted to the Tribunal which would examine whether the appellant herein is undertaking the work of conceptualising, visualising and creating the advertisement or whether it is only complying with the instructions of its clients. This aspect needs further details. Therefore, the order of the Tribunal as well as the order of the High Court is set aside.(Para 4).

Civil appeal disposed off.

Free Preview
STO 2009 SC 1677
[Date of Order: 2009-04-02]

Service Tax: Renting of immovable property: Interpretation of impugned service held by Delhi High Court in the case of Home Solution Retail India Ltd. v. Union of India and reported in STO 2009 Del 825: The Delhi High Court had, in the impugned judgment, held that renting out of immovable property by itself for business or commercial use did not constitute taxable service and services in relation to renting of immovable property alone were taxable. The High Court, further held that Service tax being a Value Added Tax, value addition was absent in renting activity and hence, renting of immovable property for use in course or furtherance of business or commerce by itself was neither a service nor a taxable service and the interpretation to the contrary placed by exemption Notification No. 24/2007-S.T., dated 22-5-2007 and C.B.E. & C. Circular No. 98/1/2008-S.T., dated 4-1-2008 was ultra vires the Finance Act, 1994.
Ordered issue of notice in Petition for Special Leave.

Free Preview
CEO 2009 SC 118
[Date of Order: 2009-03-27]
Free Preview
STO 2009 SC 1715
[Date of Order: 2009-03-27]

Sales Tax: Quantum of pre-deposit under clause (b) to First proviso under Rule 43(5) of Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975: The appellate authority has a discretion not to insist on payment as a condition precedent to entertain the appeal, for which the reasons have to be recorded in writing. The order in terms of Section 43(5) is essentially an order of stay. Three things are to be considered by the Tribunal while dealing with the application for dispensing with the pre-deposit. They are : the prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss. In such matters though discretion is available, the same has to be exercised judicially.(Para 7,8). The applicable principles have been set out succinctly in Silliguri Municipality and Ors. v. Amalendu Das and Ors. (AIR 1984 SC 653), M/s. Samarias Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. S. Samuel and Ors. (AIR 1985 SC 61) and Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Dunlop India Ltd. (AIR 1985 SC 330). It is true that on merely establishing a prima facie case, interim order of protection should not be passed. But if on a cursory glance it appears that the demand raised has no leg to stand, it would be undesirable to require the assessee to pay full or substantive part of the demand. Petitions for stay-should not be disposed of in a routine matter unmindful of the consequences flowing from the order requiring the assessee to deposit full or part of the demand. There can be no rule of universal application in such matters and the order has to be passed keeping in view the factual scenario involved.(Para 9,10).

In the instant case the only plea which the appellant was pressing into service was that if declaration forms are produced the ultimate demand would not exceed Rs. 15 lakhs. The appellant has produced certain records to submit that the declaration forms can be produced at the present juncture. Appellants was directed that on payment of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- realization of the balance payment shall be stayed until further orders. It is accepted that the amount has been deposited. Tribunal is directed to hear the appeal on merits without insisting on any further deposit in terms of Section 43(5).(Para 11,12).

Appeal disposed off.

Free Preview
CEO 2009 SC 907
[Date of Order: 2009-03-06]
Free Preview
CEO 2009 SC 916
[Date of Order: 2009-03-03]
Free Preview
CEO 2009 SC 921
[Date of Order: 2009-02-25]
Free Preview
CEO 2009 SC 918
[Date of Order: 2009-02-12]
Free Preview
STO 2009 SC 1613
[Date of Order: 2009-01-23]

Service Tax: Service recipient of Service provided from outside India or by a non-resident, having no office in India is not liable to pay Service tax prior to 1-1-2005: The Tribunal held that reliance on Notification No. 12/2002-S.T. amending Rule 2(1)(d) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 was not sufficient as services specified for purpose of said liability i.e. when provided from outside India or by non- resident, who does not have any office in India, only vide Notification No. 36/2004-S.T. issued under Section 68(2) of Finance Act, 1994 w.e.f. 1-1-2005.

Civil appeal dismissed.

Free Preview
CIO 2009 SC 84
[Date of Order: 2009-01-22]
Free Preview
CIO 2009 SC 81
[Date of Order: 2009-01-18]
Free Preview
CEO 2007 SC 51
[Date of Order: 2008-12-19]
Free Preview
STO 2008 SC 898
[Date of Order: 2008-11-27]

Service Tax: Newly inserted Explanation in Section 65(105)(zzc) of Finance Act, 1994 by Finance Act, 2010 which was made effective from 1st of July, 2003: Tribunal to examine the case de novo in the light of the aforesaid Explanation inserted in the Act. It is made clear that all issues that could arise could be urged and the same shall be decided by the Tribunal afresh.”(P-1)

Appeal allowed.

Free Preview
CEO 2008 SC 201
[Date of Order: 2008-11-27]
Free Preview
CEO 2008 SC 381
[Date of Order: 2008-11-20]
Free Preview
STO 2008 SC 639
[Date of Order: 2008-11-19]

Sales Tax: Refund of excess paid tax due to retrospective reduction in tax rate: If the substantive provision of a statute provides for refund, the State ordinarily by a subordinate legislation could not have laid down that the tax paid even by mistake would not be refunded. If a tax has been paid in excess of the tax specified, save and except the cases involving the principle of ‘unjust enrichment’, excess tax realized must be refunded. The State, furthermore is bound to act reasonably having regard to the equality clause contained in Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is not even a case where the doctrine of unjust enrichment has any application as it is not the case of the respondent/State that the buyer has passed on the excess amount of tax collected by it to the purchasers. In view of the admitted fact that tax had been collected and paid for the period 6th April, 1999 and 10th December, 1999 @ 1% of the price which having been reduced from 1st April, 1999 to 0.5 %, the State, in our opinion, is bound to refund the excess amount deposited with it. Furthermore the Notification having been given a retrospective effect must be construed on the touchstone of the purpose and object it sought to achieve. Principle of purposive construction should be applied in a case of this nature to find out the object of the Act. When a statute cannot be considered in such a manner which would defeat its object, the legislature is presumed to be aware of the consequences flowing therefrom. The statute should be considered in such a manner so as to hold that it serves to seek a reasonable result. The statute would not be considered in such a manner so as to encourage defaulters and discourage those who abide by the law.(Para 22 to 25).

Appeal allowed.

Free Preview
CIO 2008 SC 66
[Date of Order: 2008-11-17]
Free Preview
CEO 2008 SC 185
[Date of Order: 2008-11-03]
Free Preview
< Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 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.