Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Orient Paper and Industries Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Orient Paper and Industries Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Feb 21, 2005
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/38192

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue
Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

Orient Paper and Industries Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In
(2005)(183)ELT126TriDel

Excerpt

1. heard both sides. common issue is involved in these appeals, therefore, they are being taken up together.2. revenue filed these appeals against the order-in-appeal passed by the commissioner (appeals). the commissioner (appeals) in the impugned order held that question of penalty and interest will arise only if service tax is not paid within six months from 13-5-03 from the date of revalidation act. commissioner (appeals) further held that if any violation is found to have been committed, a show cause notice was issued by the proper officer. in both the cases, revenue is not disputing the fact that service tax has been paid by the appellant prior to six months from 13-5-2003.3. we find that section 68 and 70 of finance act, 2003 amended respectively by the finance act, 2003 and a new section 71a has been inserted to validate the collection of service tax from the service receiver in case of service of goods transport operator. this rule provides that in case service is provided by the goods transport operator for the period in question the service receiver shall furnish a return within a period of six months from 13-5-03. in the present case as the respondent had paid the due service tax prior to six months from the date the finance act come into force. further we find that the commissioner (appeals) held that in case there is any violation to these provisions, the proper officer can issue a show cause notice. in these circumstances, we find no infirmity in the impugned order. the appeals are dismissed.

Full Judgment

1. Heard both sides. Common issue is involved in these appeals, therefore, they are being taken up together.

2. Revenue filed these appeals against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order held that question of penalty and interest will arise only if service tax is not paid within six months from 13-5-03 from the date of revalidation Act. Commissioner (Appeals) further held that if any violation is found to have been committed, a show cause notice was issued by the proper officer. In both the cases, Revenue is not disputing the fact that service tax has been paid by the appellant prior to six months from 13-5-2003.

3. We find that Section 68 and 70 of Finance Act, 2003 amended respectively by the Finance Act, 2003 and a new Section 71A has been inserted to validate the collection of service tax from the service receiver in case of service of goods transport operator. This rule provides that in case service is provided by the goods transport operator for the period in question the service receiver shall furnish a return within a period of six months from 13-5-03. In the present case as the respondent had paid the due service tax prior to six months from the date the Finance Act come into force. Further we find that the Commissioner (Appeals) held that in case there is any violation to these provisions, the proper officer can issue a show cause notice. In these circumstances, we find no infirmity in the impugned order. The appeals are dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial