Since the training courses conducted by IIPM do not result in award of any certificate/ Diploma/ Degree or any other educational qualification recognized by the law being in force, the activity will fall under the category of Section 65 (105) (zzc) of the Act and is a taxable service liable to payment of Service Tax.
M/s. Navin Fluorine International Ltd. Vs. CCE (CESTAT Delhi) It is clear that show cause proceedings were initiated only on the ground that the amended Cenvat Credit Rules excluded the construction services as eligible input service. The appellant took credit on 30.04.2011 whereas the amendment was carried on 1.4.2011. It is nobody’s case that the […]
Various goods on which the Revenue seeks to collect Excise duty are all, admittedly, products incidentally arising during the manufacture of finished goods on which in any case, the appellant is discharging duty. These scrap material are not emerging due to a process of manufacture. Hence, they do not qualify to be taxed for excise levy.
M/s S.R. Ingots Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE & ST, (CESTAT Delhi) Revenue’s entire case for clandestine removal is based upon the recovery of certain weighment slips from the appellant’s factory during the course of the search. The appellants have taken a categorical stand that they were having the weighing bridge in their own premises also […]
There is demand of interest for the intervening period from the date of presentation of cheque till its realization. I find that as per Rule 6 (2A) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, the date of presentation of cheque is the date of payment of Service tax. Same view has been taken by the Tribunal in the case of Travel Inn India Pvt. Ltd.
M/s. Narain Packaging Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) Admittedly, the packaging is subsequent to manufacture of paper by M/s. J K Paper Ltd. The appellants claim that they have contributed to the incidental activity of manufacture. We note that the appellants are engaged in packing activity in the premises of clients. The cut […]
There is no dispute that the activities of the appellant are squarely covered within the definition of “Public Relation Services”, which was made taxable w.e.f. 01.05.2006. The stand of the respondent is that a particular service which has been newly introduced cannot be made taxable prior to the date of its introduction.
M/s. Western Union Financial Services Inc. Vs. CST (CESTAT Delhi) Appellant is to the effect that for export of service, the concept of unjust enrichment itself will not apply. To support this contention, they relied on various decided cases. The Tribunal in Pulcra Chemicals (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra), Wienerberger Brick Industries Pvt. Ltd. (supra), Vodafone Cellular Ltd. […]
M/s. Ford India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner (CESTAT Chennai) Regarding the tax liability on the consideration received due to termination of the arrangement, we note that no identifiable service can be attributed for such consideration. It is rather a termination of arrangement which itself the original authority held as a service. We note that by […]
Vaishno Associates Vs. C.C.E. & S.T.-Jaipur (CESTAT Delhi) The activity carried out by the appellant is in the nature of Erection, Commissioning or Installation and for the disputed period i.e. 2008-09 to 2009-10, the activity will also be covered under the category of Works Contract Service (WCS) which was introduced in the statute w.e.f. 01/06/2007. […]
