Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... have been incurred by the service provider as pure agents of the service recipient. however, this rule has been struck down as ultra vires the provisions of section 66 and section 67 of the finance act, 1994 by honble delhi court in the case of intercontinental consultants and technocrafts pvt. vs. union of india and others ltd. reported in 2012 tiol-966- ..... str-608 pleaded that the contracts of the appellant with their customers were for repair of transformers, that when repair and maintenance service is taxable and in term of section 67 of the finance act, 1994, service tax is chargeable on the gross amount charged, value of the goods used for providing service would have to be included in the assessable value of ..... m/s.paramax electronics pvt. ltd. 16/comm./noida/2012-13, dt. 27.7.12, passed by cce, noida 1,32,62,762/- along with interest u/s 75 of finance act, 1994 1,32,62,762/ u/s 78 ibid. 3. m/s. mahendra engineering ltd. 23/comm./lko/st/2011-12,dt. 28.11.11, passed by cce, lucknow .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... liability. the portion of the additional commissioners order dropping the penalty proceedings was reviewed by the jurisdictional commissioner of central excise, under the provisions of section 84 of the finance act, 1994 and vide order-in-revision no. 05/commr/mrt-i/2011 dated 17/02/2011 he modified the additional commissioners order by imposing ..... . the additional commissioner while confirming the service tax demand alongwith interest did not impose any penalty on the appellant under section 76, 77 and 78 by invoking the provisions of section 80 of the finance act, 1994, holding that she is satisfied that there were valid reasons for the appellants failure to discharge their service tax ..... 08 were issued to them for payment of service tax amounting to rs. 14,98,776/- alongwith interest for the period from october 2004 to december 2007 and also for imposition of penalty. the above show cause notices were adjudicated by the additional commissioner vide order-in-original dated 26/02/09 by .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... case is from april, 2002 to september, 2006, while the show cause notice was issued only on 31.3.2007 by invoking the extended period, that the extended period under proviso to section 73(1) of the finance act is not invokable inasmuch as in view of the conflicting judgments on the issue involved in this case , it ..... federation joint venture (supra) and uniworth textile ltd. (supra), neither longer period for demand of short paid service tax can be invoked nor penalty under section 78 of the finance act would be imposable. in view of this, we upheld the duty demand only for the normal limitation period, which would be quantified by the original ..... respect of packaging service. besides this, he also demanded interest on the service tax demand and also imposed penalty of equal amount on the appellant under section 78 of the finance act, 1994. on appeal being filed to the commissioner (appeals) against the addl. commissioners order, the same was dismissed vide order-in-appeal no.ind/ .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... 06 and @ rs. 200/- per day or 2% of the tax amount not paid, whichever is higher, since 19/4/06 under section 76 of the finance act, 1994 till the date of payment of the service tax, subject to the maximum of rs. 1,63,14,265/-. the commissioner in ..... within time. similarly, the last date for filing of st-3 return for the six monthly period ending 30th september 2007 was 25/10/07 and the show cause notice for demand of short paid service tax for this period could be issued upto 24/10 ..... per m.t. of saleable ignite mined by them. inquiry in respect of their activity was initiated by the department sometimes in the year 2007 and the appellant under their letter dated 09/3/07 informed the department about their activity, pleading that the services provided by them were ..... upto 24/4/09, that is one year from the relevant date, as the last date for filing of st-3 return for october 2007 to march 2008 period was 25/4/08. since, the show cause notice has been issued on 29/9/08, the same is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... pertaining to the period 8.7.04 to 3.2.2005 is barred by normal period of limitation. further, the original adjudicating authority having granted the benefit of section 80 of the finance act to the appellant, has held that there was no suppression on the part of the assessee. if there is no suppression, i fail to understand as to ..... that since it is a new tax, so he takes a lenient view and extends the benefit of section 80 of the finance act, 1994 for the purpose of imposition of penalties under section 78 of the finance act, 1994. as such, no penalty was imposed under section 78. the said part of the order of the deputy commissioner was not appealed against by the ..... into the details on merits of the case, i find that the show cause notice which was issued on 26.4.06 proposing imposition of penalties under various sections of the finance act, 1994 culminated into an order passed by original adjudicating authorities after holding the demand of duty along with imposition of penalties under .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... was rejected. it is seen that while delivering the judgment of l h sugar factories, the tribunal has taken note of all the amendment carried out by finance act, 2003 introducing amendment in section 73. 8. in view of the above, as the issue stand settled till the honble supreme court, i find no reasons to interfere in the impugned ..... appeals filed by the revenue stand listed again. 7. the notice stand issued to the respondent in terms of section 73 of the finance act, 1994. admittedly said notice stand issued after retrospective amendment vide section 115 and 117 of the finance act, 2000 by invoking the longer period of limitation. it may not be out of place to mention here that ..... filed by the revenue was rejected on merits, as well as on limitation. the tribunals decision in the case of cce raipur vs. jaiswal equipment and holdings p ltd. [2007 (7) str 665 (tri-del)] can also be referred. the list is unending and the law is settled. 11.in view of the foregoing discussion, i find no .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... order confirmed service tax liability of rs.4,67,582/-; directed recovery of the same along with interest under section 75 and penalty as stipulated in the order, in terms of sections 76, 77 and 78 of the finance act, 1994. 6. the appellant preferred an appeal contending that board circular 7.10.98, a trade notice dated ..... sub-contractor was not liable to remit service tax. 7. ld. appellate commissioner rejected the appeal by placing reliance on the board circular dated 23.8.2007 wherein it was clarified that a sub-contractor being essentially a taxable service provider was required to remit tax even if the services provided by such sub-contractors ..... by another service provider does not alter the taxability of the service provided. on the basis of the clarifications set out in the board circular dated 23.8.2007, the appellate authority confirmed the conclusion of the primary authority and rejected the appeal. 8. ld. consultant for the appellant refers to the board circular dated .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... products out of india. the department was of the view that the services being rendered by the appellant are business auxiliary service covered by section 65 (105) (zzb) readwith section 65 (19) of the finance act, 1994. however, the department was of the view that since the service has been rendered in india and is not export of service ..... india is received by the service provider in convertible foreign exchange. from 01.03.2007 to 31.05.07: while condition number (i) and (iii), as mentioned above, remained same the condition number (ii) was revised as follows: (ii).such service ..... rule 3(1)(iii). the said sub rule provided the following conditions for this service in order to constitute as export: from 19.04.06 to 28.02.2007: (i). recipient should be located outside india (ii). such service is delivered outside india and used outside india and (iii). payment for such service provided outside .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... non-paid service tax amounting to rs.63,22,985/- for the period from 10.09.2004 to 30.11.2007 along with interest thereon and also for imposition of penalty on the appellant under section 76, 77 and 78 of the finance act, 1994. the show cause notice was adjudicated by the commissioner vide order-in-original dated 1.10.2008 by ..... the above mentioned service tax demand was confirmed along with interest and besides this, while penalty of rs.65,00,000/- was imposed on the appellant under section 76 and 78 of the finance act, 1994 for non-payment of service tax and for suppressing the value of the taxable service from the department, a penalty of rs.5,000/- was imposed ..... under section 77 of the finance act, 1994 for non-submission of the st-3 returns. against this order of the commissioner, this appeal has been filed. 2. heard both the sides. 3. shri j.k. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
..... pre-closure of a loan may fall within the ambit of banking and financial services as defined in section 65(105)(zm) read with section 65(12). by the finance act, 2004 clause (viii) was introduced in section 65(12) of the act incorporating other financial services viz. lending etc. also within the ambit of banking and other financial ..... notice dated 23.10.2009 clearly attributing/alleging that the appellant, a housing finance company and a subsidiary of the bank of baroda had provided business auxiliary service, a taxable service defined in section 65(19) of the finance act 1994 (the act); had received consideration from its customers towards fee for permitting pre-closure of loans ..... by the appellant to its customers by way of facilitating fore-closure of loans clearly falls outside the ambit of business auxiliary service defined in section 65(19) of the act. the ld. dr does not contest this position. 14. there is however a contention on behalf of revenue which we have not comprehended .....
Tag this Judgment!