Interest Rates |
Interest Rates |
Case Laws Related |
STO 2013 CESTAT 75
Interest: Delayed Refund under Notification No. 17/2009: Section 11BB applicable to Finance Act, 1994 by virtue of Section 83.
|
STO 2013 CESTAT 51
Interest: Delayed refund under Notfn. No. 41/2007-ST: Admissible as Section 11BB is applicable to Finance Act, 1994 by virtue of Section 83 thereof.
|
STO 2013 CESTAT 151
Interest: Refund: Delay in sanctioning refund even though department did not file appeal against Order from which the refund arises: Liability of the revenue to pay interest under Section 11BB of the Act commences from the date of expiry of three months from the date of receipt of application for refund under Section 11B(1) of the Act and not on the expiry of the said period from the date on which order of refund is made. |
STO 2012 CESTAT 979
Interest: Delayed refund: appellant is eligible for the interest after three months of filing of the refund claim with the authorities till the same was sanctioned to the appellants. |
STO 2012 CESTAT 976
Interest: Delayed refund: Appellant held eligible for interest on refund after 3 months from the date of filing refund claim and not from the date when the order was passed by higher appellate forums. |
STO 2012 CESTAT 763
Interest: As per section 75 interest payable from the due date till actual date of payment: Appellant had not put in place system by which tax is due for each month and no reasonable cause is adduced for such failure for prolonged period. So the appellants are liable to penalty under section 76. |
STO 2012 CESTAT 327
Interest: Cenvat Credit wrongly taken not utilized: Interest Payable.
|
STO 2010 CESTAT 678
Service Tax: Business Auxiliary Services: Commission paid to foreign agents: Section 66A: Reverse Charge mechanism: Interest of delayed payment : Refund : Though it is not in dispute that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax during the material period, the fact remains that they paid the tax and also paid interest thereon. What was thus enjoyed by the appellant was the statutory benefit of CENVAT credit of an amount of service tax belatedly paid by them. The appellant claimed refund of the interest paid on the service tax belatedly paid. They are not entitled to claim such refund as the amount of interest paid by them was inextricably linked with the amount of service tax already availed and utilized as CENVAT credit, in their business. (para 4) |
STO 2010 CESTAT 609
Service Tax: Interest liability under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994: Scope: As per Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994, every person, liable to pay tax who fails to credit the tax or any part thereof to the account of the Central Government within the prescribed period, shall pay simple interest at a rate not less than 10% and not in excess of 36% p.a. The assessee paid service tax by way of debit in CENVAT credit amount and later on made good the error by making payment in cash. Therefore, Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly held that this is not a case of failure to make payment but only an adoption of an incorrect method for payment, and therefore, the provisions of Section 75 are not attracted against the assessees.(Para 2).
Revenue appeal rejected.
|
STO 2009 CESTAT 450
Service Tax: Waiver of pre-deposit and stay: There is no representation for the party despite notice, nor any request for adjournment. The original authority imposed a penalty on the party but the latter had no objection. Hence, the appellant is directed to make pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, as applicable to defaulters of service tax.(Para 2).
Pre-deposit ordered.
|