CESTAT Kolkata held compensation under the Coal Mines Act is not consideration for tolerating an act, setting aside service tax, interest and penalties.
CESTAT held that while excise duty on royalty was payable for the normal period, no interest could be levied and duty on Stowing Excise Duty was set aside.
CESTAT set aside the Service Tax demand after finding that trading turnover was wrongly treated as taxable service and VAT records were ignored.
CESTAT held Sections 11B and 11BB inapplicable as the refunded amount was not Service Tax, directing payment of 12% interest on delayed refunds.
CESTAT Kolkata held that encashment of a bank guarantee for shortfall in Minimum Guarantee Tonnage is not consideration for tolerating an act under Section 66E(e). The service tax demand and penalty were therefore set aside.
CESTAT held that Income Tax data without corroborative evidence cannot establish service tax liability and quashed the demand.
CESTAT held CRC was not payable as Customs failed to prove full-day deployment. MOT charges alone applied for limited supervision services.
The Tribunal held that service tax under RCM could not be demanded where the department failed to prove that the assessee held mining rights or paid royalty for a mining licence. It also ruled that reliance solely on balance sheet entries was insufficient.
CESTAT Kolkata held that the respondent had paid the Service Tax before availing CENVAT credit on the disputed invoices. Finding no error in the adjudicating authority’s order, it dismissed the Revenue’s appeal.
The CESTAT Kolkata held that the Revenue failed to establish suppression of facts or intent to evade Service Tax during a period of legal uncertainty over the taxability of renting immovable property. It consequently set aside the entire demand as time-barred.
