"June, 2012" Archive

Assessing Officer must record ‘reasons’ before issuing notice u/s. 148

Dadanbai B. Bachani Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)

Adverting to the present case, it is clearly evident that 'reasons recorded' were not provided to the assessee despite categorical directions by the ITAT and even when the so-called "reasons recorded" have been supplied after a gap of almost 11 years, it is amply clear from the face of it that the 'reasons' were not recorded prior to the ...

Read More

Person reimbursing the freight not liable to pay Service Tax

Bhagyalaxmi Electroplast (P.) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Hyderabad (CESTAT Bangalore)

Entire demand on the freight element is based on Rule 2(1)(d)(v) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Sub-clause (v) was inserted in Rule 2(1)(d) only on 3.12.2004 and the same cast Service Tax liability on the person paying the freight. Prima facie, the appellant did not pay the freight and therefore there is no tax liability on their part....

Read More

Service Tax Payable on Reimbursement of ‘Integral and inseparable’ expenses

Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore Vs International Logistics (CESTAT Delhi)

Expenses incurred to provide taxable services shall be part of assessable value if such expenses are inseparable and are integrally connected with the performance of the taxable services. Such expenses shall necessarily form part of the assessable value. Therefore, the assessee was not entitled to any relief on account of expenses not dis...

Read More

Section 531A Prohibits lease of property for 30 years by a Company one year prior to its winding up petition

Sri Krishnasamy Reddiar Educational Trust Vs Official Liquidator (Madras High Court)

The appellant is said to have entered into a lease agreement with the company-in-liquidation on 22-1-2000, for demised building of 8,400 sq.ft. along with adjacent vacant land (about 5.33 acres) for a lease rent of Rs. 5,000 per month for a period of 11 months, which expired on 21-12-2000. Again, the company-in-liquidation is said to have...

Read More

No Penalty for Non payment of service tax due to sudden crash in stock market

N.V. Securities Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Siliguri (CESTAT Kolkata)

The assessee had reflected the service tax liability on account of service provided by him during the period April, 2007 to September, 2007 in the ST-3 returns filed with the department. The reason for delay in making payment had been sufficiently explained by the assessee in his reply, stating that due to sudden crash in the stock market...

Read More

Service Tax on study materials provided by Commercial training or coaching service provider

FIITJEE Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi (CESTAT Delhi)

Prima facie coaching material has intimate connection with the commercial coaching provided by the assessee and the contents of the study material are relevant to the coaching to make the later fruitful and meaningful so that the enrolled candidates are benefited out of commercial coaching. There was no evidence to effect that these coach...

Read More

Service Tax – Things to consider to grant benefit of Section 80 of Finance Act, 1994

B.S. Cable Network Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi)

Since the appellant prays that it has a case for consideration under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 it is desirable to bring to record about the date on which liability arose, date of return ought to have been filed, date on which admitted tax liability should have been discharged and the date of discharge of duty liability. If these...

Read More

Lapse on the part of litigant concerned in filing appeal on time alone is not enough to turn down his plea

Sree Rajendra Mill Ltd. Vs IOCEE Exports Ltd. (Madras High Court)

When the defendant has alleged non-receipt of the said letter dated July 31, 2006 and urges the same for not taking steps, the reasons stated by the appellant do not appear to be false or frivolous. It must be remembered that in every case of delay, there is some lapse on the part of the litigant concerned. That alone is not enough to tur...

Read More

Party to the dispute entitled to know the grounds on which authority has rejected his claim

Fraport AG Frankfurt Airport Services Worldwide Vs Asst. Director of IT (ITAT Delhi)

Recording of reasons in support of a decision on a disputed claim by a quasi-judicial authority ensures that the decision is reached according to law and is not the result of caprice, whim or fancy or reached on grounds of policy or expediency. A party to the dispute is ordinarily entitled to know the grounds on which the authority has re...

Read More

Common area has to be excluded while computing built-up area for benefit u/s. 80-IB(10)

CIT Vs Raghavendra Constructions (Karntaka High Court)

Keeping in mind the fact that obstacles were put in assessees getting the benefit, the Legislature introduced the definition of built-up area in sub-section (14)(a) of section 80-IB. From a reading of the definition of built-up area, the intention is clear. In calculating the built-up area it is only the inner measurements of the resident...

Read More
Page 1 of 5212345...102030...Last »