It is held that the various terms of the Agreement make it vividly clear that the possession has always remained with the Appellant itself. Undoubtedly, it is the obligation of the Appellant to make the vehicles available, with their respective drivers, for being deployed on routes, and as per schedule, specified by DTC.
The Hon’ble Court of Karnataka held that: In terms of Composition Scheme, tax would be paid on total consideration of Works contract; The Petitioner has segregated the activities as per the work orders executed against the offer for erection and installation of wind turbine generator
The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka held that the Revisional Authority can cancel and set aside the Assessment order and direct the Assessing officer to pass fresh Assessment Order but could not proceed to pass an Assessment Order. Thus, theRevisional Authority has clearly exceeded its jurisdiction in proceeding to reassess the case and to that extent, the Order passed by the Revisional Authority is wholly unjustified in law and liable to be quashed.
In the instant case, Mahanagar Gas Ltd. (“the Appellant”) availed Cenvat credit on the strength of debit note issued by the service provider. The Department denied the Cenvat credit on the ground that debit note is not a prescribed document in terms of Rule 9(1) of the Credit Rules or Rule 4Aof the Service Tax Rules.
In the instant case, Addisons Paints & Chemical Ltd. was manufacturing paints and varnishes falling under Chapter 32 of the Excise Tariff Act. The final products manufactured were packed in tins and plastic containers which were then put in carton boxes for the purpose of transportation and then sold to the wholesale dealers.
The Hon’ble CESTAT, Mumbai held that there is no dispute that the Appellant vide application dated December 16, 2004 has applied for Centralized Registration and the letter bears the stamp of the receipt by the Department. This request can be considered as an application for Centralized Registration, which was granted subsequently by the Department. Thus, Cenvat Credit should not be disallowed.
The Hon’ble CESTAT Bangalore relying upon the decision in the case of CCE Vs. Muniruddin [2013(31) STR 136 (All.)] held that even ignorance of law can be one of the reasons for invoking erstwhile Section 80 of the Finance Act. Accordingly, penalties imposed under various Sections of the Finance Act were waived.
In the instant case, Fazlani Exports Pvt. Ltd. (the Appellant) was engaged in export of goods outside India for which it has availed various services viz. Terminal Handling Service, GTA services etc. Accordingly, the Appellant filed several refund claims under Notification No. 17/2009-ST dated July 7, 2009 read with Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated October 6, 2007 as amended,
The Hon’ble Apex Court held that even though the goods were found to be different, payment of duty taking comparative value was done with bona fide belief. When entire exercise was revenue neutral (i.e. credit of duty paid on captive consumption was available to the Appellant itself), the Appellant could not have achieved any purpose to evade duty.
NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SERVICE TAX: NEGATIVE LIST, DECLARED SERVICES, EXEMPTION AND SERVICE TAX RULES, 1994 – ISSUES AND WAY FORWARD With the Government paving the way for Finance Act, 2015, the rate of Service Tax has been hiked from 12.36% to 14% w.e.f. 1st June 2015. The Government is also proposing to impose another two per […]
