As part of ‘Ease of Doing Business’ initiative of Department of Commerce (DOC), following transactions were identified by DOC as important applications made by SEZ units and Developers to Development Commissioner’s office and DOC for various Approvals/intimations/reporting. DOC had requested NDML to develop and deploy online submission process for the same.
In the instant case, the First Appellate Authority denied the Cenvat credit on Capital Goods on only ground that Wimplast Limited (the Appellant) had purchased the Capital Goods on hire purchase or loan agreement form a Company which was not a financial Company as prescribed under Rule 4(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (the Credit Rules), which reads as unde
Sterlite Industries Limited (the Appellant) filed a refund claim of Rs. 7,11,45,917/- on September 27, 2004 for accumulated credit under the provisions of Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (the Credit Rules) but
The Central Board of Excise and Customs (Board”) issued an Instruction F. No. 206/05/2014-CX.6 dated November 3, 2014 in respect of pre-audit on artificially splitting up of Rebate claims. On coming across to the fact that assesseesare avoiding the per-audit of Rebate claims by artificially splitting up Rebate claims so as to keep each individual […]
In the instant case, Central Warehousing Corporation (the Appellant) was rendering both taxable as well as exempted services. The Appellant was availing Cenvat credit of the common input services and not maintaining separate records in respect of such input services consumed
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs vides Notification No. F. No. 1/19/2014-CL-V dated November 3, 2014 has amended the Company Law Board (Fees on Applications and Petitions) Rules, 1991 (the Rules) which shall come into force on the date of their publication in Official Gazette.
Urja Engineers Limited (the Appellant) availed the ineligible Cenvat credit and the same was duly reflected in the periodicalreturns filed with the Department. The unit of the Appellant was audited by both the Internal Department’s Audit Team as well as CERA but no objection was raised by them.
The Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Kerala Classified Hotels and Resorts Association and others Vs. Union of India and others [2013-TIOL-533-HC-KERALA-ST]held that levy of Service Tax on Restaurants and hotels is beyond legislative competence of Parliament.
In terms of Section 73(3) of the Finance Act,when the Service tax liability was discharged along with interest before issuance of SCN, no penalty would be imposable on the Appellant.
Article 265 of the Constitution of India mandates that no tax can be levied or collected except as provided by law. Accordingly, mere fact that the Assessee had made some payments and also made promise to make further payments cannot be used against our refusing to interfere with the impugned order.
