Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Tribunal noted that Rule 4A (1)(i) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 requires disclosure of service tax payable on the value of service provided, thus, it cannot include exempted services. Moreover, a proviso inserted to the Rule by an amendment cannot enlarge the scope of the provision, at best it is only clarificatory.
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.
The Tribunal opined that both service provider and service recipient were government undertakings and cannot be said to have any intention to evade the tax payment.
The Tribunal opined that once the coal companies have charged sales tax/VAT at the appropriate rate on the sale of coal to appellant and in turn, appellant has charged sales tax/VAT to the consumers of coal, the transaction is one of sale/purchase and not of rendering service.
“It is very simple in the accounting standards that unless invoice is raised consideration is not collected. Therefore, it is very clear from the record that the appellant was not receiving any consideration from card companies.”
“The services like wireline logging, perforation and other wireline related services involving mechanical jobs which were undertaken by appellant at the time of drilling an oil well are integrally connected with the mining of oil or gas and have a direct nexus with the drilling of a well.”
Criminal Law — Criminal Trial — Proof — Burden and Onus of proof — Recourse to S. 106 of the Evidence Act
As the service tax needs to be computed in terms of Rule 2A of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 and as the assessee has not opted for the composition scheme, the matter is remitted back to the CESTAT for re-computation of the demands.
The Delhi High Court held that the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise cannot continue the proceedings for adjudication of the impugned show cause notice, after the lapse of thirteen years.
by Tarun Jain†
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 28
The Delhi High Court set aside the demand for service tax of Rs. 56 crores against MTNL holding that the surrender of any right to use the spectrum before 14-5-2016, the date on which the Finance Act, 2016 came into force, will not be chargeable to service tax.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 427 — Consecutive or concurrent running of sentences: Normal rule is that such subsequent sentence shall
The practice and procedure, both pre and post GST are consistent and involve participation of the officer of the DGGI in issuance of show cause notices.
CESTAT states that cancelled flat bookings amount to non-performance of service,Held that Service tax is not applicable if no service is rendered.
The supply of ISO Tankers on lease/rental basis by foreign suppliers to the appellant would amount to a ‘deemed sale’ under Article 366(29A) of the Constitution as the appellant throughout had effective control and possession over the ISO Tankers.
AIFF did not render any service but concurred with the agreement whereby the rights were transferred from ZEEL to IMGR
The High Court has also observed that the Service Tax Department cannot invoke the extended period on the sole ground of omission as the same can be invoked only when that there is a deliberate intention to evade payment of tax.
Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal: The coram of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) set aside
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The coram of Dilip Gupta (President) and Subba Rao (Technical Member) allowed
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The coram of Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) allowed the