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. […]
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. […]
M/s G.P. Ispat Pvt. Limited Vs CCE&ST ( CESTAT Delhi) We are lead to the conclusion that in the case of the appellant, the demand of Central Excise duty cannot be upheld, since the allegation of clandestine removal has been made only on the basis of alleged shortages noticed during stock verification. In the absence […]
For the period prior to 16.06.2005, it was held that the activity of retreading of tyres restore the tyres to its functional form and the same will not come under the category of Maintenance or Repair.
M/s Tirathdas Shaukat Rai Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE (CESTAT Delhi) 1. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 8thAugust, 2012 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Indore. The appellants are engaged in construction activities. The dispute in the present appeal relates to two main activities of the appellant, namely construction of residential units […]
Supdt. of Police Vs. CCE&ST (CESTAT Delhi) Brief facts of the case are that the appellant, Superintendent of Police of various districts in the State of Rajasthan are alleged to have been engaged in providing Security Agency Service covered under Section 65(105)(w) of the Finance Act, 1994 without having the registration for the services. As […]
Vehicles are not meant to be used for movement of materials in the mines. Consequently, we are of the view that such goods cannot be covered under capital goods since they are in the nature of motor vehicle other than dumper and dipper. Consequently, tyres of such vehicle can also not be allowed for availing cenvat credit.
