The coaches are rolling stock of railways. They are for transport mode and cannot fall under the commercial object of industrial building, factory, plant or machinery, etc. The interpretation of the original authority is far fetched and not sustainable in view of the plain meaning of the statutory definition for tax entry.
The Show Cause Notice has to be viewed in its entirety and cannot be vivisected as may be convenient for the Revenue. Thus, if a show cause notice is found as not valid or issued without jurisdiction in respect of the main protagonist, the very same SCN cannot be held as sustainable for other noticees like the appellants herein.
These 7 appeals are involving common dispute and are accordingly taken up together for disposal. 6 appeals are by assessees. One is by Revenue. The appellant assessees are engaged in health care services to the patients and they are managing well-known hospitals/medical centres in various places.
M/s Vodafone Essar Digilink Ltd. Vs. CCE (CESTAT Chandigarh) The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the cenvat credit on towers, shelters & prefabricated building etc. of Rs. 5,88,13,400/- has been denied. Consequently, the duty was demanded along with interest and equivalent amount of penalty has been imposed. Aggrieved from the said […]
The CESTAT, Bangalore bench, while allowing Cenvat Credit to M/s. Nvidia Graphics Pvt. Ltd, recently held that Outdoor Catering and Air Travel Agency service are Input Services.
A division bench of the Ahmedabad CESTAT recently held that Service Tax is not payable for screening of films in multiplex on a revenue sharing basis. The issue before the bench was that whether the appellant, M/s PVS Multiplex Pvt Ltd is liable to pay service tax on the screening of films in their multiplex and also whether they are liable to pay service tax under the head renting of immovable property?
In view of settled legal position regarding need for physical removal of capital goods or inputs, in order to attract the provisions of Rule 3 (5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, we find that there is no justification to invoke such provision to demand and recover any amount from the appellant in this case
The Brand promotion fee was not taxable until Negative list came into effect from 01.07.2010 and hence there cannot be any liability upon the Respondent till that period.
The Bangalore bench of the CESTAT, last week ruled that limitation cannot be invoked for denying refund of service tax paid by assessee by mistake under the provisions of Finance Act, 1994.
They provide the SMS Aggregator services to M/s Facebook under an agreement for which the bills were raised to M/s Facebook, Ireland and the amount was received in convertible foreign currency. They filed four refund applications towards refund of unutilized cenvat credit of input services used for export of services in terms of Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules,2004
