Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance act 1968 Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat Page 16 of about 10,965 results (0.114 seconds)

Bhuvaneswari Agencies (P) Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Central

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in : (2008)12STT427

..... /export cargo, as these activities do not fall within the ambit of the definition of "business auxiliary services". he refers to the definition under the said heading of finance act, 1994 wherein the term "business auxiliary services" defined under section 65(19) means any service in relation to: (i) promotion or marketing or sale of goods ..... and negotiating the same with the shipping lines on behalf of the clients will fall under definition of 'business auxiliary services' under section 65(19) (ii) of finance act. i find that more specific category for coverage would be under the 'steamer agent' service which clearly refers to the type of activities carried out by the ..... behalf of a shipping line".the promotion or marketing of service provided by the client in category (ii) of 'business auxiliary services' under section 65(19) of finance act has to be read along with category (i) and (iii) of the definition of 'business auxiliary services'. it cannot be broad enough to bring in a specified .....

Anjali Foods Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

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

Reported in : (2008)9STR203

..... and forwarding agent's for the period july, 2002 to september, 2003. the original authority imposed penalty equal to tax, on the assessee under section 78 of the finance act, 1994. it also imposed other penalties on the party. the appellate authority vacated the penalty imposed under section 78. the present appeal is against the remaining penalties, ..... which were imposed under sections 75a, 76 and 77 of the finance act.2. after examining the records and hearing both sides, i note that, as indicated in the impugned order, the assessee voluntarily paid service tax with interest before ..... of the show-cause notice. the challenge at present is against the penalties imposed on them under sections 75a, 76 and 77 of the finance act. the penalty under section 75a is on the ground that the appellants had failed to get themselves registered with the department under section 69 of the .....

Cce Vs. Bhandari Hosiery Exports Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

..... .5. in this case the demand is for the period from 9.2.2004 to february, 2006 prior to introduction of section 66a of the finance act. the provisions of section 66a of the finance act provides that the recipient of taxable service which is provided by a person who is residing outside india is liable to service tax. the corresponding rule ..... (7) str 443 for the proposition that services provided outside india are liable for service tax w.e.f.18.4.2006 with introduction of section 66a of the finance act.4. contention of the revenue is that as per provisions of rule 2(1)(d)(iv) during the relevant period the recipient of the service was liable to pay ..... 2 the service tax rules also amended thereafter. i find that prior to the introduction of section 66a of the finance act there was no charging section under the act. further, i find that the tribunal in the case of foaster wheeler engg. ltd. (supra) held that the recipient of service which was provided .....

Gupta Coal Field and Washeries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, N ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... 4.2010, a show-cause notice was issued to appropriate the amount of service tax paid along with interest and invoking the provisions of section 76 and 77 of the finance act, 1994. the show-cause notice was adjudicated and service tax along with interest was appropriated and penalty under section 76 and 77 were also imposed on the appellant. ..... the imposition of these penalties, appellant is before us. 3. shri bharat raichandani, advocate appeared before us and submitted that as per provisions of section 73(3) of the finance act, 1994, the show cause notice was not required to be issued to them. to support this contention, he relied on the board circular no. 137/167/2006-cx4 dated ..... get the shoulder of section 73(3) and no penalty will be imposed on the assessee. 5. heard both sides and perused the provisions of section 73(3) of the finance act, 1994 which are reproduced here as under:- sec. 73(3) - where any service tax has not been levied or paid or has been short levied or short paid .....

Stellar Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)(146)ELT388Tri(Mum.)bai

..... 2. the brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the business of "air travel agent". as per section 70(1) of chapter v of the finance act 1994, they were required to file their return in form st-3 for the quarter ending september, 1997, december, 1997, march, 1998, september, 1998 and march, 1999 within ..... possible to hear the appeal itself therefore after waiving the pre-deposit of penalty of rs. 92,400/- imposed for contravention of section 76 and section 77 of the finance act, 1994 for late payment of tax as well as for late filing of service tax returns, i proceed to hear the appeal itself with the consent of both sides. ..... the stipulated period. since they failed to do so show cause notice was issued proposing penalty under section 77 of the finance act, 1994. the notice was adjudicated by the assistant commissioner who imposed a penalty of rs. 87,800/- under section 76, and rs. 4,600/- under section 77 of the .....

Catalyst Capital Services Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(184)ELT34Tri(Mum.)bai

..... of the appellants that there is no mala fide intention on the part of the appellants in making the late payment of service tax. there is also provision in the finance act for waiver of the penalty where sufficient cause is shown. as the appellants had already deposited the service tax and as there was no mala fide intention in making the ..... commissioner, central excise, division k-iii, mumbai-iv, imposed penalty of rs. 7,105/- under section 76 of the finance act, 1994 for delay in payment of service tax and imposed rs. 2,000/- under the provisions of section 77 of the finance act, 1994 for late filing of st-3 returns.3. the appellants had already deposited rs. 7,105/- towards penalty under ..... 1. the appellants have contravened the provisions of section 68 and 70 of chapter v of the finance act, 1994 inasmuch as the said assessee failed to pay the service tax on due date and failed to furnish half-yearly returns in the prescribed form i.e. st-3 .....

V.B. Information Systems Vs. Cce

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

Reported in : (2005)(102)ECC522

..... 1998 in terms of the "explanation" added to rule 57 cc.3. ld. counsel has submitted that, in the above circumstances, any penalty is not justifiable. before finance act, 2005 came into force, there was no statutory mechanism for recovery of rule 57 cc dues and accordingly the appellants resisted the demand. such mechanism has been introduced by the ..... finance act, 2005, with retrospective effect. thus it is by the operation of law that the dues adjudged by the lower authorities have become recoverable. in such circumstances, according ..... of the appeal by pointing out that, for the period of dispute, there is a recovery mechanism under rule 57 cc as retrospectively amended by the finance act, 2005 vide with section 82 (1)(b) read with sl. no. 2 under the fourth schedule.3. after examining the relevant provisions of the .....

D.R. Gade Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... any pecuniary advantage gained by the appellant is neutralized by payment of interest. moreover, the appellant's case squarely falls under the provision of section 80 of the finance act, 1994. the appellant being a small tax payer, the revised penalty imposed by the commissioner is unduly harsh on him. accordingly, i set aside the impugned ..... the commissioner is harsh and pleads for setting aside the said enhancement.4. i find that the commissioner has totally overlooked the provision of section 80 of the finance act, 1994 which reads as under :- notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of section 76, section 77, section 78 or section 79, no penalty shall be imposable ..... delayed payment. he has also imposed a penalty of rs. 4,0007- under section 76 and a penalty of rs. 500/- under section 77 of the finance act, 1994.the impugned order has been passed by the jurisdictional commissioner revising the order of the original authority and enhancing the penalty of rs. 4,000/- under .....

Cce Vs. Milap Marbles (P) Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in : (2006)(109)ECC12

..... liability fastened upon the respondents in respect of services received by them in the case of goods transport operators. by a retrospective amendment vide section 117 of finance act, 2000 the service receivers were required to pay service tax in respect of gto, provided demand of service tax was raised within the time as provided by ..... retrospective amendment. in this case the demand was raised in october, 2002 i.e.almost 2 years after amendment of the finance act. adjudicating proceedings culminated in confirmation of demand of service tax and imposition of penalty. on appeal the commissioner (appeals) set aside the order-in-original on ..... pay - person receiving taxable service of goods transport operators is not liable to tax - even though these persons are deemed liable to pay tax under section 69 of finance act, 1944 (as amended) as liability to file returns is cast on them only under section 71a ibid, and not under section 70 ibid, they are not covered .....

S. Ramanand Aiyar and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

..... by the tribunal in the case of r. b. bahutule v. commissioner . the larger bench held that under section 76 of finance act, the penalty shall not be less than rs. 100/- per day which may extend to rs. 200/- for every day during which such failure continues. in the present case ..... tribunal in the case of r.b. bahutule v. cce, mumbai 4. ld. dr pointed out that in view of the conflicting decision regarding interpretation of section 76 of finance act, the matter was referred to larger bench in the case of eta engineering ltd and the larger bench of the tribunal reported as eta engineering ltd. v. cce, chennai ..... half yearly return.2. the adjudicating authority imposed a penalty of rs. 100/- per day under section 76 of the finance act. for late filing of returns also penalty of rs. 2000/- was imposed under section 77 of the finance act.3. the only contention of the appellant is that as per the provisions of section 76 during the relevant period only .....