Finance Act 1994 Archives

Services provided to individual by advocate or firm are exempted from levy of service tax; Orissa HC quashes Rs. 2 Lakhs service tax notice

Services provided by an advocate or a Partnership firm of advocates providing legal services to any person other than a business entity and a business entity with a turnover up to rupees ten lakhs in the preceding financial year are exempted from the levy of service tax.

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

‘Registration of premises is not a condition precedent for availing CENVAT credit’; CESTAT sets aside order disallowing CENVAT credit

The services were not received by the appellant regarding which invoices have been issued to the appellant’s other two addresses, other than the address for which service tax registration has been taken, is contrary to the contention stated by Revenue in the show cause notice. Therefore, the same is not sustainable in law.

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

‘Racetrack not meant for public access as a right, thus not exempted from tax’; CESTAT upholds order directing to pay service tax for construction of racetrack

The Tribunal stated that for a place to fall within the ambit of a public place, the element of right of access of public was a necessary concomitant.

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

Demand of service tax u/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster’s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates

“With coming into force of interest provisions, the revenue neutrality concept has undergone a change, so as to consider duty neutrality different from revenue (Duty+interest) neutrality. Latter at time may not exist, even if former is present.”

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Explained| Can services rendered by a “Consulting Engineer” prior to 2005 Amendment to the Finance Act be subjected to service tax?

Supreme Court settled the issue of whether “body corporate” is excluded from the definition of “consulting engineer” under Section 65(31) of the Finance Act, 1994 prior to the amendment in 2005.

Case Briefs High Courts

Sikkim HC | Court refuses to condone delay where application drafted in haphazard manner and with nary a care to detail or explanation

Sikkim High Court: A Division Bench of Vijai Kumar Bist, CJ and Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. dismissed a writ petition filed against the

Case Briefs High Courts

Bom HC | ‘Dominant user’ of construction in question to be seen while considering application of Section 65 (2-b) of Finance Act, 1994

Bombay High Court: S.C. Dharamadhikari and M.S. Karnik, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed against the order passed by Central Excise and Service Tax