Advanced Search Results

M/S. National Construction Company Vs. Cce, Jaipur

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi

Subject : Service Tax

interest thereon under Section 75 of Finance Act, 1994 and also for imposition of penalty on them under Section 76, 77 and 78 ibid. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur II vide … the activity of the appellant was taxable as cargo handling service under Section 65 (105) (Zr) of the Finance Act, 1994 till 15/06/05 and thereafter from 16/06/05 to 31/05/07 their activity was taxable as site formation and clearance, … and Allied Services Ltd. vs. CCE, CUS and ST, BBSR reported in 2008 (9) S.T.R. 531 (Tri. Kolkata), wherein the Tribunal held that cargo, in

Cce., Ahmedabad Vs. M/S. Om Sai Engg Works and Others

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad

Subject : Service Tax

STR 417 (Del.)] as under: 16. No doubt, Section 78 of the Act has been amended by the Finance Act, 2008 and the amendment provides that in case where penalty for suppressing the value of taxable service under Section … respondents for evasion of service tax during the said periods, but did not impose penalty on them under Section 76 of the Act relying upon the following decisions:(i). CCE Vs. First Flight Couriers Ltd. [2011 (22) STR 622

Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Commissioner Service Tax

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service Tax

which they have not paid during the period May, 2006 to March, 2008, should not be recovered under Section 75 of the Finance Act. 1994; … not be recovered under Section 75 of the Finance Act. 1994; (iii) Penalty should not be imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, as amended in view of failure to pay the Service Tax amounting to … not be demanded and recovered under the proviso to the Section 73(1) read with Section 68 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Rule 6 of Service Tax Rules, 1994 and education cess under Section 95 of Finance Act

G.V.Matheswaran Vs. the Union of India

Court : Chennai

Subject : Service Tax

and ultra vires the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended by the Finance Act, 2007 and Finance Act, 2008. 36 In view of paragraph no.30 above, upholding the validity of Section 65(105)(zzzz) and 65(90-a) of the Finance … of Entry 49, List-II, Seventh Schedule, Articles 14, 19 and 246(3) of the Constitution of India, (ii) Section 76(A)(6)(h) and Section 77 of the Finance Act, 2010 as null and void and ultra vires the Constitution of

Maganti Rama Rao Vs. the Commissioner of Central Excise Hyderabad-iii ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Subject : Service Tax

i.e., Rs.3,69,459/- paid by the assessee on 8.12.2008 and 19.12.2008. 3. I refrain from imposing any penalties under Section 76 or Section 78 of Finance Act 1994 drawing powers from Section 80 of Finance Act 1994. 4. An … Rs.1,96,184/- (ST-192161+E.Cess-4022) as detailed in Annexure-I to this order, towards service tax not paid under Section 66 of Finance Act, 1944. I further, appropriate the amount of Rs.1,96,184/- from the amount already paid i.e., Rs.3,69,459/- paid by the

Sree Lotus Exports Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

order in original. Further, as per the provisions of Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, penalty under Section 76 cannot be imposed, when penalty under Section 78 has been imposed. But, in our case penalty has been … at the reduced rate of 25% of the penalty as per the provisions of Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. It is a mandatory requirement to mention this option in the order in original. But, the same

M/S Municipal Corporation Jalandhar Vs. Cce, Ludhiana

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Subject : Service Tax

tax of Rs.1,25,23,555/- against the appellants along with imposition of penalties u/s 78, 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. After hearing both the sides, we find that the impugned order confirms two Show Cause Notices … 73 of Finance Act, 1994 and Section 75 ibid and also for imposition of penalty on them under Section 76, 77 and 78 ibid.  The show cause notices were adjudicated by the Commissioner by a common order dated

Orissa State Beverages Corporation Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and o ...

Court : Orissa

Subject : Service Tax/VAT

Reported in : 108(2009)CLT33; [2009]19STJ357(NULL)

therefore, the said service tax not paid became liable for recovery under proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 along with interest under the provisions of Section 75 of the said Act. It was further alleged … seven other writ applications being numbered as W.P.(C) Nos. 7991, 6138, 260, 7159, 7986, 9776 and 5536 of 2008 have been filed by different suppliers seeking declaration of the nature of their contract entered into with the … Rules, 1994 and, therefore, the Petitioner is liable to penalty under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the said Act.4. The Petitioner in response to

M/s Mehta Export Corporation Vs Commissioner of Central Excise,Customs ...

Court : Chennai

offacts and willful intent to evade payment of tax as discussed supra. V.vi. I drop the penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 on M/s Mehta Export Corporation as discussed supra. vii. I impose a penalty … in Order-in-original in C.No. V/BAS/15/17/2009-ST ADJN. dated 24.12.2025 for the FY 2006-2008 passed under Section 73 of the Finance Act,1994 by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and not in accordance with law.For Petitioner(s): Mr.Sivaraman

Alstom Projects India Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Subject : Service Tax

only. With reference to the reliance placed by the appellants on the amendment of Rule 2(b) by the Finance Act, 2008, the ld. counsel submits that the appellants do not propose to press this ground.4. The ld. counsel has … with interest under Section 75 of the Act and imposed on them a penalty equal to tax under Section 76 of the Act. The appeal filed by the party against the decision of the adjudicating authority did not