Rohit Surfactant Pvt Ltd Vs CGST, C.C & C.E- UJJAIN (CESTAT Delhi) It is seen that the Cenvat Credits have been disallowed by the lower authority, vide the impugned order, by observing that the services fall within the exclusion category specified in Rule 2 (I) (C). This exclusion clause disallows the Cenvat Credit in respect […]
Preet Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs C.S.T.-Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) Business model of the appellant was such that they used to get commission from financial institutes for introducing customers. The said financial institutes used to pay commission in a fixed percentage on the loan amount disbursed to the end customer. After this commission, the appellant […]
M/s Rathi Tiles Pvt. Limited Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi) The question which has been decided by the lower authorities is whether the appellant is liable to pay service tax by considering such debit notes as consignment notes. I have perused the various case laws cited by both The issue which stands settled in the various […]
M/s Escorts Limited Vs CST (CESTAT Delhi) It is not in dispute that the appellant is in possession of permit to operate ‘Non-scheduled Air Transport Services and have been permitted to use Bell-407 helicopter with the sitting capacity of six persons. The permit further stipulate that it is for passenger services and has been renewed […]
Department of Fisheries Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi) Leasing of water bodies for fishing purposes is same as leasing of vacant land for aquaculture and therefore, same is fully covered under the exclusion clause of Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 and hence not leviable to Service tax. Thus, […]
The appellant has developed a course relating to Diploma in Advance Software Technology. Such course has been run through affiliated centers and out of the fee charged from the students, 25 per cent of the fees has been retained by the appellant. Revenue’s case is that Service Tax is liable to be paid on the said amount retained, under the category of Franchise Services.
The respondent/assessee is engaged in providing the “construction of residential complex services, real estate agent services and business support services”. During the course of audit of records of the respondent/assessee it was observed that the assessee had availed Cenvat credit of service tax paid on “commission/brokerage on sale of flats” amounting to Rs. 40,56,453/- during the period from July 2013 to September 2015. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the respondent/assessee as to why
M/s. Paramount Communications Ltd. Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi) It is a matter of record that the appellant assessee have availed services of certain foreign based agencies for receiving external foreign commercial borrowings (ECB) from abroad. It is also a matter of fact that during 2006 to 2007, certain payments in the form of commission have […]
Shri A K Prasad Vs Shri S. K. Bansal (CESTAT Delhi) The Evidence Act does not contemplate or permit the proof of an electronic record by oral evidence if requirements under Section 65B of the Evidence Act are not complied with, as the law now stands in India. Thus, it has been clearly laid down […]
Olam Agro India Ltd. Vs C.C.E (CESTAT Delhi) A corporate guarantee is used when a corporation agrees to be held responsible for completing the duties and obligations of debtor to a lender, in case the debtor fails to comply with the terms of the debtor- lender contract. Whereas a bank guarantee is a promise from […]
