CESTAT held that, there is no need to establish one-to-one correlation between output service exported and input service used in such services.
CESTAT held that, no service tax is to be imposed on liquidated damages recovered for not adhering to time limits mentioned in the contract as the same would not be covered in ‘Declared Services’ mentioned under Section 66E(e) of the Finance Act, 1994
GST payable at the time of transfer of possession/ rights in the building to person supplying development rights In Re: M/s. Vajra Infracorp India Private Limited [TSAAR Order No.03/2021 decided on July 19, 2021] wherein the assesee is provider of taxable services of construction of residential complexes. The assessee entered into a supplementary agreement with […]
Hon’ble CESTAT, Delhi observed that Carting Challan is not equivalent to a Consignment note. Carting Challan is only for internal control of forest department whereas a Consignment Note is a negotiable instrument in which the transporter is bound to deliver the goods to a bonafide holder of title.
Appellant is entitled to refund of the amount of Cenvat Credit lying in their Cenvat Credit account on closure of business along with interest.
Under the GST regime services of employee to employer is considered as neither supply of goods nor supply of services as per the Schedule III of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
The Hon’ble High Court, Delhi directed that proceedings pursuant to the SCN and Impugned summons shall continue but the final orders shall not be given effect to till disposal of the writ petition. Listed the case on August 9, 2020 for next hearing.
It is the settled law that when both board’s circular and the judgment of Court of law is prevailing and the judgment has contrary view than to the board circular in such case the Court’s judgment will prevail over the board circular.
Further, stated that illusionary pre-show cause consultation notice is not only arbitrary, but is in utter disregard and in contravention of the very object and purpose of the above Master Circular.
Appellant availed credit on the Service tax paid and applied for refund under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 (CENVAT Credit Rules) for the period July, 2013 to September, 2013.
