Sponsored
    Follow Us:

All CESTAT

CESTAT passes Strictures against Advocate for making frivolous arguments

February 6, 2017 1308 Views 0 comment Print

This as a fit care where the Bench may recommend to Tamilnadu Bar Council to take appropriate action against him. But, by keeping a lenient view in mind, we adjourn the case at the cost of Rs. 1,000/-(Rupees on thousand only) which will deposited by the counsel toward Prime Minister’s Relief Fund within three days from today. On the next date of hearing, proof of deposit shall be submitted.

Section 11AC: No Interest / Penalty on value of goods escalated by buyer retrospectively

December 8, 2016 1275 Views 0 comment Print

The fact of the case is that the respondent had cleared their finished goods to their customer by valuing the goods on the basis of purchase order placed by them by their customers. However, consequent upon price escalation, their customers amended the purchase order and revised the price of the goods on the higher side with retrospective effect.

Service Tax Excess payment can be adjusted in Subsequent months

August 4, 2016 33606 Views 0 comment Print

Appellant is the centrally registered taxpayer and the error committed could not be detected immediately and it took almost a month to recognise the excess payment made in the month of May, 2011 and hence it was adjusted against the tax liabilities for the month of July, 2011

Service tax not applicable on sale of statistical data

June 4, 2016 789 Views 0 comment Print

Ms Society of Indian Automobile Vs CST (CESTAT Delhi) So far as demand of service tax on sale of statistical data (statistical service subscription) is concerned we find that the appellant provide various kind of data pertaining to automobile industry after collecting the same from various sources. This data is available to members as well […]

Cenvat credit eligibility depends on taxability of output services on date of receipt of capital goods

June 1, 2016 1223 Views 0 comment Print

I find that an identical issue in respect of the capital goods received for the manufacturing of final products which were exempted, was being heard and the eligibility for availing the credit was decided by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Spenta International Ltd. v. CCE 2007 (216) ELT 133 (Tri. – Mum.). The ratio of the said judgment is clearly recorded in paragraph 10, which is reproduced as under :-

Tax exemption can't be denied for Service fee designation in Rs.

May 20, 2016 1186 Views 0 comment Print

It is held that although contract, undoubtedly, designates the consideration in Indian rupees so that the service provider is not put to loss on account of currency fluctuations and merely because Service provider designates the consideration in Indian rupees, his Service Tax Exemption on Exports cannot be denied,

Department cannot insist to avail particular option under Rule 6

May 20, 2016 2182 Views 0 comment Print

They were availing Cenvat credit of education cess paid on the inputs used by them in the manufacture of tractors. The tractors manufactured by the appellants are exempted from payment of excise duty vide Notification No. 23/2004-CE dated 09/07/2004.

Tribunal's decisions binding on lower authorities

May 19, 2016 5980 Views 0 comment Print

It was held that the Tribunal’s decisions are binding on the lower authorities and cannot be ignored on the sole ground that the Revenue may prefer to file appeal against the same before the higher authorities until and unless the same is set aside by a higher forum.

Exports to SEZ should be included for Refund of Service Tax

May 19, 2016 2986 Views 0 comment Print

It was held that when the revenue proceeded to include the value of SEZ exports in computing the total turnover, the same should also have been included in computing export turnover and accordingly the value of export turnover should be equal to the total turnover and the value of SEZ exports should be included in the export turnover (numerator).

Penalty on Firms than No separate penalty on partners

May 19, 2016 3529 Views 0 comment Print

Once partnership firm penalized, separate penalty not imposable upon partner of the firm because the partner is not a separate legal entity as there is no difference between the partner and the partnership firm.

Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031