Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance act 2006 section 29 amendment of section 115wc Page 1 of about 27,216 results (1.790 seconds)

Commissioner Vs. B.C. Kataria, General Manager, Dhillon Kool Drinks an ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : 2008(221)ELT508(P& H)

..... learned counsel for the assessee-respondent that the commissioner (appeals) would continue to enjoy power of remand after deletion of that power from section 35a(3) of the act, by amendment made by the finance act, 2001. we are of the considered view that reliance placed on the judgment of gujarat high court in the case of commissioner ..... [1957]1scr488 .3. the ratio of the judgment as extracted above clearly brings out that amendment in section 35a(3) of the act was carried in the same manner by the finance act, 2001 itself in section 128a(3) of the 1962 act and a perusal of both the provisions in juxta position would show that they are same before and after ..... of 2006, decided on 8.3.2007). in the case of m/s enkay (india) rubber co. pvt. ltd. (supra) the revenue has raised the issue as to whether the power of remand, which was earlier conferred on the commissioner (appeals) by the finance act, 1980, was specifically taken away by the finance act, 2001 by amending the provisions of section .....

Royal Enfield Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai

..... (appeals) modified the adjudication order in so far as the demand of tax was restricted for the period from 19.4.2006 to january 2007 along with interest. penalty was waived by invoking section 80 of the finance act, 1994. the assessee filed appeal before the tribunal against the demand of tax along with interest for the period from 19.4 ..... an amount of rs.10,27,257/- along with interest and penalty for the period april 2006 to january 2007. the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of service tax of rs.10,27,257/- along with interest under section 73 (1) of the finance act, 1994 and disallowed the cenvat credit of rs.10,27,257/- under rule 14 of the ..... .2006 to jan'07. revenue also filed appeal against setting aside the demand of tax prior to 19.4.2006 and waiver of penalty. 2. the learned .....

Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai Vs. Chillies Export House Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai

..... relating to the period 18.4.2006 to 30.9.2007 is time-barred. c) the demand relating to the period from 1.10.2007 to 29 ..... and rs.5000/- under section 77 of the finance act. however, he refrained from imposing penalty under section 76. 3.2. on appeal by the party, commissioner (appeals) held that a) no service tax is payable by the respondent as recipient for the period from 16.6.2005 to 17.4.2006 i.e. prior to introduction of section 66a of the finance act, 1994 b) the demand ..... .12.2008 is sustainable and penalty under section 76 is also liable to be imposed. d) the original authority to calculate the actual .....

initiating Explosives Systems Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Reported in : (2008)9STR509

..... bharti v. union of india reported at . during the pendency of the refund claim, the provisions of the law were revalidated retrospectively by section 117 of finance act, 2000. in view of the revalidation act, the levy of service tax, during the relevant period, is a valid levy. the commissioner (appeals) followed the decision of the tribunal ..... as to whether the nature of activity carried out by the ici (india) ltd. was clearing and forwarding agent in terms of section 65(25) read with section 65(105)(j) of finance act, 1994. such a controversy was elaborately dealt by tribunal in its different decisions which were not at all before the learned commissioner ( ..... appeals) while passing the impugned order. in paras 7 to 10 of the reported decision in the case of mahavir cenerics v. cce, bangalore 2006 (3) s .....

Competent Automobiles Co. Ltd. Vs.commissioner of Service Tax

Court : Delhi

..... unit of maruti udyog limited (mul) paid certain amounts of commission to the petitioner; the commercial activity underlying this transaction falls within the description of business auxiliary service under section 65(105) of the finance act, 1994. therefore, service tax is payable by the petitioner. a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the commissioner of service tax on 21.12 ..... proceedings were initiated for non-payment of tax for the period february 2004 to march 2006. after considering the submissions of the petitioner, the commissioner of sales tax took note of the legislative changes brought about by amendment with effect from 10.09.2004 to the finance act, 1994 and determined the demand at `1,56,48,080.91/- together with interest and .....

Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Kolkata

Court : Kolkata

..... maintain records for five years only. (15) the petitioner contends that the show cause-cum-demand notice dated 21st april 2006 was issued on the grounds of suppression under the proviso to section 73 (1) of the finance act, 1994, which was not in existence during the material period of time i.e.1st october, 2000 to 9th september ..... is barred by limitation and is thus without jurisdiction. the show cause cumdemand notice is dated 21st april, 2006 and pertains to the period 1st october, 2000 to 31st march, 2005. in this connection, section 73 of the finance act, 1994 is relevant and the same, in so far as material for the present purpose is set out ..... impugned show cause notice has been validly issued under the proviso to section 73(1) of the finance act, 1994 as substituted by finance (no.2) act, 2004. the provision having been substituted completely prior to the issuance of the show cause notice dated 21st april, 2006, it was incumbent upon the assessing officer to issue notice in accordance .....

Commissioner of Income Tax Kolkata Xii Vs. M/S Calcutta Export Company

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... hardships which were being caused to the assessees belonging to such second category, amendments have been made in the provisions of section 40(a) (ia) by the finance act, 2010.23) section 40(a)(ia), as amended by finance act, 2010, with effect from 01.04.2010 and now reads as under: 4(a)(ia) any interest, commission or ..... counsel for the parties and perused the factual matrix of the case. point(s) for consideration:-5) whether the amendment made by the finance act, 2010 in section 40(a)(ia) of the it act is retrospective in nature to apply to the present facts and circumstances of the case. rival contentions:-6) learned senior counsel appearing on ..... further contended that the amendment made under section 40 (a) (ia) by the finance act, 2010, clearly states that the amendment has the retrospective effect from the assessment year 2010-11 and it cannot be held to be retrospective from the assessment year 2005-2006.8) learned senior counsel further contended that the high court erred .....

Lsg Sky Chefs (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Service Tax

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

..... impugned order the appellants are required to pre-deposit the following amounts: i. rs. 58,04,581/- service tax demanded under section 73(i) of the finance act 1994 for the period from 10.09.2004 to 31.03.2006. iv. penalty of rs. 1000/- imposed for mis-declaration of value on taxable services 3. shri g. shivdass, learned ..... v. commissioner of central excise, chandigarh i 5.8. when no service tax is payable the question of interest under section 75 and penalties under section 76, 77 and 79 of the act, does not arise. section 80 provides that no penalty shall be imposable on the assessee for any failure if the assessee proves that there was reasonable ..... cause of the said failure. thus, the act statutorily provides for waiver of the penalty. the following decisions are relied on.tamil nadu kalyana mandapam assn. v. union of india 2006 .....

Duttmenon Dunmorrsett vs.union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

..... the value of services that was subjected to levy.2. the levy in this case was, for the first time, introduced on 01.09.2009 by insertion of section 65(105)(zzzzm) of the finance act, 1994 by way of substitution. the two show cause notices issued to the petitioner cover the period from 01.09.2009 to 30.06.2012. the petitioner ..... , the impugned order, i.e. the order in original dated 31.03.2017 of the learned assistant commissioner relied upon rule 5 of the service tax (determination of value) rules, 2006 (hereafter referred to as w.p.(c) 4740/2017 page 1 of 6 the rules ) to hold that the reimbursement, by its clients to the petitioner, had to be included ..... such 'taxable service'. that according to us is the plain meaning which is to be attached to section 67 (unamended, i.e., prior to may 01, 2006) or after its amendment, with effect from, may 01, 2006. once this interpretation is to be given to section 67, it hardly needs to be emphasised that rule 5 of the rules went much beyond the mandate .....

Umang Agarwal Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad

Reported in : (2008)110ITD391(All.)

..... the a.y. 2002-03 should have been considered by the a.o. as undisclosed income for the block period. the cit took recourse to the provisions of section (sic) substituted by the finance act, 2002 with retrospective effect from 1.7.1995 according to which no reduction on account of income disclosed in the return from a.y. 2002-03, which is ..... was issued for the a.y. 2002-03 on 15.10.2004. thereafter, regular assessment for the a.y. 2002-03 was made under section 143/148 on 29.03.2006 and the income disclosed in the return amounting to rs. 53, 27,812/- has been duly taxed and considered in regular assessment.finally, same income could not be taxed twice, ..... . 645 (gujarat), cit v. mehsana district cooperative milk. 7. 101 ctr (2006) p. 1095 (itat mumbai), mrs. khatize s. comerbhoy v. ito.against this, the ld. d.r. relied on the order of the cit and emphasized that what has been done is according to the amendment made by the finance act, 2002, wherein such income is to be included in the block .....