Advanced Search Results

State of Kerala Vs. Aravind Ramakant Modawdakar and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Motor Vehicles

Acts : Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976; Kerala Finance Act, 1994(Amended) - Sections 4, 22 and 74; Constitution of India - Article 14 - Sections 3

Reported in : AIR1999SC2970b; JT1999(5)SC588; 1999(3)KLT115(SC); 1999(4)SCALE680; (1999)7SCC400

the Schedule to the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976, as amended by Section 4 of the Kerala Finance Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') whereby the State had enhanced the rate of quarterly tax in respect

M/S. Kanjirappilly Amusement Park and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of In ...

Court : Kerala

Subject : Service Tax

removal of admission and access to entertainment event and amusement facilities [sub-clause (j) of Section 66D of the Finance Act, 1994] from the Negative List of Services by an Amendment of 2012 and the consequent imposition of service tax … on the price for admission to any entertainment at a rate not less than 24% and not exceeding 48%. The measure applicable to amusement parks; is separately provided under Section 3B, a non-obstante clause; different from that

Bharti Airtel Ltd. (Formerly Bharti Tele Ventures Ltd.) Rep. by Its He ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Sales Tax/VAT

Acts : Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - Sections 2(15), 2(29), 3 and 39; Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules; Companies Act, 1956; Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 - Sections 4; Finance Act, 1994; Sale of Goods Act, 1930 - Sections 2(7); Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 2(22) and 12; Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 - Sections 2; Kerala General Saks Act 1963 - Sections 2(7); Indian Electricity Act, 1910 - Sections 39; Sales Tax Act; Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 19, 19(1), 226, 246, 366(12) and 366(29A)

Reported in : (2009)22VST465(Karn); 2009(3)AIRKarR235(D.B)

It has also been registered with the 5th respondent, namely, the Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore under the Finance Act, 1994 and it has been regularly paying 'Service tax' in respect of the said service.(b) The Appellant Company has … Indian Companies Act, 1956. It has been granted license by the Government of India, Ministry of Telecommunications, under Section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 for providing 'broad hand services' to its subscribers. It has also been

M/s. D.P. Jain and Company Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service Tax

2012 was enacted. By this enactment, sections 97 and 98 have been inserted in Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. Section 97 of the Finance Act, 1994 provided for retrospective exemption to activity of management, maintenance and repairs of … 3. The writ petition is directed against the order-in-original dated 28th November, 2014 passed by respondent no. 2. 4. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, having registered office at the address

Asiatic Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Subject : Service Tax

Reported in : (2008)(224)ELT406Tri(Kol.)kata

2(d)(xvii) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994.3. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994 provides filing of an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal without vesting any power of discretion for admitting the … Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Bhubaneswar has ordered for recovery of a Service Tax amount of Rs. 45,889.00 (Rupees forty-five thousand eight hundred and eighty-nine) from the appellants and crediting the same to the Consumer Welfare

M.N. Dastur and Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Service Tax

Acts : Finance Act, 1994 - Sections 65, 65(13), 65(48), 66, 68, 68(2) and 81; ;Central Excise Act; ;General Clauses Act, 1897 - Section 2(42); ;Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944; ;Indian Partnership Act, 1932 - Section 4; ;Companies Act, 1956 - Section 3(1); ;Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964; ;Income Tax Act; ;Bihar Land Reforms Act - Section 2(O); ;Service Tax Law - Section 65; ;Service-tax Rules, 1994 - Rule 6 and 6(1)

Reported in : [2005]128CompCas618(Cal),(2005)197CTR(Cal)633,2006[4]STR3

to whether the expression 'engineering firm' used in the definition of consulting engineer in Section 65(13) of the Finance Act, 1994, Chapter V relating to service tax includes a company.Submission on behalf of the appellants :2. Dr. Pal pointed … or in the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, the definition of the word 'firm' as defined in Section 4 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, is to be adopted, namely, a firm is a compendious method of

imagic Creative Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Sales Tax/VAT

Acts : Finance Act, 1994; Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - Sections 60; Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 - Sections 12 and 12(3); Karnataka Sales Tax Rules - Rule 3; Kerala Sales Tax Act - Sections 6(4) and 24(1); Customs Act - Sections 2(22); Sales Tax Act; Parliamentary Act; Legislative Act; Constitution of India - Articles 246, 366 and 366(29A); Tariff Act

Reported in : 2008(56)BLJR1038; 2008(1)CTC843; JT2008(1)SC496; 2008(1)SCALE356; (2008)2SCC614; 2008[9]STR337; [2008]12STT392; (2008)12VST371(SC); [2008] 1 SCR 457

evolution of prototype conceptual design (i.e. creation of concept), on which service tax had been paid under the Finance Act, 1994 as amended from time to time is liable to tax under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 … 1994 as also the Act. An order of assessment was passed by the Assessing Authority in terms of Section 12 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act and Rule 3 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Rules, material portion … Tax on item 1 150005%KST on item 3 15001.5%Resale Tax on item 4 3000RupeesFive Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Five OnlyTotalRs.5,89500INVOICEConsigneeM/S MORRIS TOOLING PVT. LTD.DoddaballapurBangaloreCoordinatedby Mr.

Bharti Telemedia Ltd and ors. Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi and anr

Court : Delhi

Subject : Banking

Acts : Delhi Entertainments and Betting Tax Act, 1996; Finance Act, 1994 - Section 65(105)(zk); Government of India Act, 1935; West Bengal Entertainment-cum-Amusement Tax Act, 1982 - Section 4-A; Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 - Section 4; Constitution of India - Article 246

DTH service is a broadcasting service falling within the meaning of taxable service under section 65(105)(zk) of the Finance Act, 1994 and is amenable to service tax @10.33% on the gross amount paid by a subscriber for providing the … legislatively incompetent." 20. Purvi Communication (supra) is a decision of a three- judge bench of the Supreme Court. Sub-section (4-a) of Section 4-A of the West Bengal Entertainment-cum-Amusement Tax Act, 1982 was the subject matter of consideration before

Jodhpur Chartered Accountants Society and anr., Vs. Union of India (Uo ...

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Service Tax

Acts : Finance Act, 1994 - Sections 65 to 68; Constitution of India - Articles - 246, 248 and 276

Reported in : [2003]264ITR529(Raj); 2006[3]STR344; 2002WLC(Raj)UC708

distinct from the profession, trade, calling, employment, etc. (B) Legislative history : Parliament introduced service tax by the Finance Act, 1994, which received the assent of the President of India on May 13, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the … service tax and the same applies to the taxable services enumerated therein. In exercise of powers conferred by Section 94 of the Act of 1994, the Central Government has enacted the Service Tax Rules. Initially service tax … judgment.2. The first writ petition being D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4018 of 1998 has been filed by the Jodhpur Chartered Accountants Society. The

M/S. Jmj Constructions, Rep. by Its Managing Partner Vs. the Assistant ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Service Tax

under the impression that it had paid the entire service tax, in terms of Section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. However, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem-I Division, the first respondent herein, had issued a show cause … Accordingly, he had passed the order, dated 27.1.2011, rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner, as time barred. 4. It has been further stated that the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the third respondent challenging the