Fiitjee Ltd. Vs. Cce

Fiitjee Ltd. vs Cce

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Sep 26, 2007

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/46218

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/46218
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: R Abichandani
Decided On: Sep 26, 2007
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

Fiitjee Ltd.

Respondent

Cce

Legal References

Reported In: (2008)12STJ71CESTATNew(Delhi)

Excerpt

1. after hearing both sides and going through the relevant material on record, it appears that, prima-facie the adjudicating authority has not imposed penalty because at the time when the service was paid, the rate applicable was 8%. the fees for coaching services were charged in advance by the appellant. having regard to the nature of taxable service and, the fact that the total amount chargeable for the academic period was taken in advance, and service tax was paid on that amount, the appellant could not have contemplated an increase in the rate of tax at that time. therefore, there shall be waiver of pre-deposit of the amount of penalty payable under the impugned order, during the pendency of this appeal.2. the application stands disposed of accordingly. the appeal will now come ud for final hearing in its due course.

Full Judgment

1. After hearing both sides and going through the relevant material on record, it appears that, prima-facie the adjudicating authority has not imposed penalty because at the time when the service was paid, the rate applicable was 8%. The fees for coaching services were charged in advance by the appellant. Having regard to the nature of taxable service and, the fact that the total amount chargeable for the academic period was taken in advance, and service tax was paid on that amount, the appellant could not have contemplated an increase in the rate of tax at that time. Therefore, there shall be waiver of pre-deposit of the amount of penalty payable under the impugned order, during the pendency of this appeal.

2. The application stands disposed of accordingly. The appeal will now come UD for final hearing in its due course.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Fiitjee Ltd. vs Cce Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge R Abichandani