Assessee not expected to verify with Department in order to avail Cenvat credit, whether supplier had paid duty on inputs or not. We are sharing with you an important judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar vs. M/s. Kay Kay Industries [AIT-2013-147-SC] on following issue:
What will be the relevant date for determining the rate of Service Tax applicable – whether the date of providing service or the date of issue of invoice or date of making payment?
Persons who are not liable to pay service tax (because of an exemption including turnover based exemption), are not required to file ST-3 return in terms of Circular No.97/8/07-ST dated August 23, 2007 and cited judgement. Even if service tax return is filed late/ failed to file return – No Penalty in terms of Rule 7C of the STR. For Nil return Assessee is not even required to opt for VCES.
The Revenue alleged that various charges like freight, labour, electricity, telephone, etc.,which were reimbursed by the Principals on actuals should be included in the taxable value of C&F Service. In this regards, the Hon’ble CESTAT held that the reimbursable expenses received by the assessee need not be added to the taxable value related to C& F Agents Service.
M/s Winsome Yarns Ltd. is manufactures of Yarn. During the period from September, 2009 to May, 2010, the Appellant were availing the exemption Notification No. 29/2004-CE dated July 9, 2004 in respect of the yarn manufactured and cleared for export as well Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated July 9, 2004 in respect of clearances intended for domestic consumption.
CA Bimal Jain Eligible Person: – • Non Filers/ Stop Filers • No Notice or an Order U/S 72 (Best Judgment) or U/S 73 (Taxes not levied/ not paid or short levied/ short paid or erroneously refunded) or U/S 73A (ST collected to be deposited with CG) has been issued or made before the 1-3-2013 […]
In this context the Appellant contended that security deposit has no nexus with the area of the property rented out. It is charged as six months’ rent and therefore, it cannot be said that the notional interest has influenced the consideration received for the services rendered.
M/s Arcadia Share & Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. (“the Appellant”) was engaged in rendering stock broker services. However, the Appellant discharged service tax liability under the wrong accounting code i.e. service tax was remitted under the accounting code for education cess. The Department confirmed demand against the Appellant for non-payment of service tax under proper accounting code.
Whether the Cenvat credit reversal is required, where no service tax is paid on output services owing to non-recovery of consideration in case the assessee pays service tax on receipt/ collection basis under Rule 6(1) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994
We are sharing with you an important judgement of the Hon’ble Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal of Bangalore (the CESTAT) in the case of the CCE Vs. M/s Amar Roto Prints [2013-TIOL-926-CESTAT-BANG] on following issue: Issue: Whether Cenvat credit can be denied on inputs used in a process not considered as manufacture and […]
