Gujarat: Notification regarding exemption on narrow woven fabric | Chandigarh: The Central Sales Tax (Punjab) (First Amendment) Rules, 2015 | Haryana: Date of effect of increase in rate of tax on Diesel | Goa Value Added Tax (Tenth Amendment) Rules, 2015 | Maharashtra: Exemption to drugs for the treatment of Cancer | Bihar Settlement of Taxation Disputes Act, 2015 | Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax (Amendment) Act, 2015 | West Bengal: Extension of the last date of filing VAT Return | Delhi: Input Tax Credit - Furnishing additional security | Haryana Value Added Tax (Second Amendment) Rules, 2015 |

Recent Updates

2015-VIL-368-MAD-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |High Court Cases | 02.09.2015

... The assessee availed Cenvat Credit on capital goods used in the erection of various capital goods, viz., M.S.Plates, M.S.Angles, M.S.Channels and H.R. Plates, which were purchased and utilized in the construction/erection of plant - Show cause notice stating that these are not capital goods and a demand was made - The Tribunal following the decision in the case of Vandana Global Ltd allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue – Assessee in appeal - HELD - Earlier decision on similar issue in favor of assessee - We find no distinguishable fact or issue contrary to the earlier decision of this Court – Following the principles l... [Read more]

... The assessee availed Cenvat Credit on capital goods used in the erection of various capital goods, viz., M.S.Plates, M.S.Angles, M.S.Channels and H.R. Plates, which were purchased and utilized in the construction/erection of plant - Show cause notice stating that these are not capital goods and a demand was made - The Tribunal following the decision in the case of Vandana Global Ltd allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue – Assessee in appeal - HELD - Earlier decision on similar issue in favor of assessee - We find no distinguishable fact or issue contrary to the earlier decision of this Court – Following the principles laid down in the decision of Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur v. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd and the earlier decision of this Court in India Cements revenue appeal is dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-466-CESTAT-DEL-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 02.09.2015

... supply and installation of cables and lines (connectors) for distribution and transmission of electricity for the Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board (MPSEB) through its instrumentality M/s Madhya Pradesh Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd. (MPKVVCL) – HELD – Vide Notification No.45/2010-ST dated 20.7.2010 taxable services relating to transmission and distribution of electricity provided by a service provider to a service receiver for the period upto 21.6.2010 was exempted from service tax - the appellant is not liable to collection of service tax in terms of said Notification – Assessee appeal allowed... [Read more]

... supply and installation of cables and lines (connectors) for distribution and transmission of electricity for the Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board (MPSEB) through its instrumentality M/s Madhya Pradesh Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd. (MPKVVCL) – HELD – Vide Notification No.45/2010-ST dated 20.7.2010 taxable services relating to transmission and distribution of electricity provided by a service provider to a service receiver for the period upto 21.6.2010 was exempted from service tax - the appellant is not liable to collection of service tax in terms of said Notification – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-367-MAD|VAT |High Court Cases | 02.09.2015

... the course of export - sale of goods by the assessee to the Branch Office of exporter at Chennai for being exported to a foreign buyer through its Head Office at Bombay – sale to Branch office for export by Head Office - Issue of Form-H by Head Office at Bombay – Denial of benefit under Section 5 (3) of the CST Act – Assessee in appeal - HELD – In pursuance of the export contract entered with the foreign buyer by the Head Office (of exporter), orders were placed with the assessee by the Branch Office for supply of goods. The goods were supplied through the Branch Office at Chennai for being forwarded to the Head Office at ... [Read more]

... the course of export - sale of goods by the assessee to the Branch Office of exporter at Chennai for being exported to a foreign buyer through its Head Office at Bombay – sale to Branch office for export by Head Office - Issue of Form-H by Head Office at Bombay – Denial of benefit under Section 5 (3) of the CST Act – Assessee in appeal - HELD – In pursuance of the export contract entered with the foreign buyer by the Head Office (of exporter), orders were placed with the assessee by the Branch Office for supply of goods. The goods were supplied through the Branch Office at Chennai for being forwarded to the Head Office at Bombay for export to the foreign buyer. The Head Office at Bombay made the export and issued Form-H for the purpose of enabling the assessee to seek the benefit under Section 5 (3) of the CST Act - The revisional authority is incorrect in reasoning that the Branch Office is independent of the Head Office and, therefore, Form-H issued by the registered Office at Bombay on behalf of the Chennai Branch Office is not correct - there is no specific bar for the Branch Office to collect and forward the goods to the Head Office, for exporting the same in furtherance to a contract of export - Form-H issued by the Head Office on behalf of the Branch Office is in order. It does not matter whether Form-H is issued by the Branch Office or the Head Office so long as the sale has occasioned the export - The movement of goods through the Branch Office does not take it outside the purview of export sale - the transaction made by the appellant-assessee and the subsequent export is inextricably connected because the sale by the assessee has occasioned the export of the goods, therefore, benefit under Section 5 (3) will necessarily follow – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-464-CESTAT-BLR-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 02.09.2015

... 3.2006 - Denial of refund for the reason availment of credit prior to the actual payment of service tax and supplies made to another EOU and not a direct export – HELD - The lower authorities have disallowed the refund on the sole ground that the credit was availed before service tax was actually paid. However, it is not clear as to when the credit was availed and when the service tax was paid. If the service tax stands paid prior to the claim of refund, the said fact of availing the credit before actual payment will not make much of difference, inasmuch as the credit availed during the period prior to actual payment of se... [Read more]

... 3.2006 - Denial of refund for the reason availment of credit prior to the actual payment of service tax and supplies made to another EOU and not a direct export – HELD - The lower authorities have disallowed the refund on the sole ground that the credit was availed before service tax was actually paid. However, it is not clear as to when the credit was availed and when the service tax was paid. If the service tax stands paid prior to the claim of refund, the said fact of availing the credit before actual payment will not make much of difference, inasmuch as the credit availed during the period prior to actual payment of service tax would have remained in their Cenvat credit account only. However, in the absence of any clarity the impugned order is set aside and matter remanded verification of facts [Read less]

2015-VIL-462-CESTAT-AHM-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 01.09.2015

... use Agent (CHA) charges and Courier / Freight charges – HELD – The main contention of the Revenue is that the service tax paid by the service provider under some different services (i.e. other than CHA), cannot be considered to be paid under CHA service - service provider wrongly paid the Service Tax under CHA, which would be covered under the category BAS - it is well settled that the jurisdictional Central Excise officer of the recipient of the service, cannot question the classification of the service of the service provider - Revenue contentions are unacceptable - Refund on Courier service - the copies of receipts rece... [Read more]

... use Agent (CHA) charges and Courier / Freight charges – HELD – The main contention of the Revenue is that the service tax paid by the service provider under some different services (i.e. other than CHA), cannot be considered to be paid under CHA service - service provider wrongly paid the Service Tax under CHA, which would be covered under the category BAS - it is well settled that the jurisdictional Central Excise officer of the recipient of the service, cannot question the classification of the service of the service provider - Revenue contentions are unacceptable - Refund on Courier service - the copies of receipts received from the courier would show all the required details. Hence, there is no force in the submissions of the Revenue - if the Assessee is eligible for refund of service tax paid on courier service, the denial of refund for failure to mention export invoice number and IEC are merely procedural infirmity when the payment of service tax and export of the goods are undisputed – Revenue appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-460-CESTAT-CHE-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 01.09.2015

... n (i) outward transportation (ii) mobile phone services; and (iii) the documents showing the payment of tax addressed to Head Office – HELD - Claim of Cenvat credit in respect of service tax paid on the Outward Transport Services is concerned, law is well settled by Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai Vs M/s. Borg Warner Morse Tec. Murugappa Pvt. Ltd - Claim on availing of mobile phone services is concerned, there is no material on record to suggest that the mobile phones were no way related to the manufacture or in relation to manufacture or for the activities permitted by Rule 2 (l) o... [Read more]

... n (i) outward transportation (ii) mobile phone services; and (iii) the documents showing the payment of tax addressed to Head Office – HELD - Claim of Cenvat credit in respect of service tax paid on the Outward Transport Services is concerned, law is well settled by Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai Vs M/s. Borg Warner Morse Tec. Murugappa Pvt. Ltd - Claim on availing of mobile phone services is concerned, there is no material on record to suggest that the mobile phones were no way related to the manufacture or in relation to manufacture or for the activities permitted by Rule 2 (l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Therefore, assessee succeeds on this count - So far as denial of Cenvat credit on the services used with the documents addressed to Head Office is concerned, there appears no material to suggest that particular services was not used for the purpose stated in Rule 2 (l) of the CCR, 2004. Therefore, the claim thereon is allowed – Assessee appeal allowed and revenue appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-463-CESTAT-AHM-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 01.09.2015

... ctrodes used in factory – Capital goods - HELD – The said cylinders are used for filling Nitrogen gas which is used in the analytical laboratory as well as in the process plant and these cylinders are used for the storage of Nitrogen gas which is utilized for in or in relation to manufacture of finished excisable goods - Capital goods are defined to mean ‘storage tank used in the factory of the manufacturer of the final products’ - From the usage of the subject Nitrogen Cylinder, it is clear that they are used for storing the Nitrogen Cylinder and therefore serves the purpose of storage tank – Appellant is eligible for Cen... [Read more]

... ctrodes used in factory – Capital goods - HELD – The said cylinders are used for filling Nitrogen gas which is used in the analytical laboratory as well as in the process plant and these cylinders are used for the storage of Nitrogen gas which is utilized for in or in relation to manufacture of finished excisable goods - Capital goods are defined to mean ‘storage tank used in the factory of the manufacturer of the final products’ - From the usage of the subject Nitrogen Cylinder, it is clear that they are used for storing the Nitrogen Cylinder and therefore serves the purpose of storage tank – Appellant is eligible for Cenvat credit on Nitrogen Cylinder and on welding electrodes – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-366-ALH|VAT |High Court Cases | 01.09.2015

... o believe’ for proposing reassessment – Assessee manufacturing brass ingots - reassessment proposal indicating that as per the general norms, the production should be 94% from the brass scrap however less production was shown by the petitioner to the tune of 54% and, therefore, there was a huge melting loss leading to escapement of tax – HELD - The expression "reasons to believe" is not a subjective satisfaction on the part of the assessing officer. The belief has to be in good faith and must have a rational connection with the issue involved – In this case the belief of the assessing authority is patently perverse and aga... [Read more]

... o believe’ for proposing reassessment – Assessee manufacturing brass ingots - reassessment proposal indicating that as per the general norms, the production should be 94% from the brass scrap however less production was shown by the petitioner to the tune of 54% and, therefore, there was a huge melting loss leading to escapement of tax – HELD - The expression "reasons to believe" is not a subjective satisfaction on the part of the assessing officer. The belief has to be in good faith and must have a rational connection with the issue involved – In this case the belief of the assessing authority is patently perverse and against the figures shown in the assessment order and/or the balance sheet - the assessing authority has wrongly included the production of brass slag, steel and iron brass mix as melting loss - the very basis for making ground for a reassessment and for having a reason to believe that some turnover had escaped assessment is lacking and is not existing in the instant case - the impugned notice issued by the assessing authority under Section 21(2) of the Act for initiating reassessment proceedings and the permission so granted by the Additional Commissioner are wholly without jurisdiction and are quashed – Assessee writ petitions are allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-461-CESTAT-BLR-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 01.09.2015

... of telephone exchanges and other items - Purchase orders contained price escalation/de-escalation clauses – Provisional assessments - upon escalation in the price appellants were raising supplementary bills and were immediately paying duty on the basis of the said supplementary bills - Demand of interest prior to finalization of the assessment – HELD – The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CEAT Ltd. vs. CCE&C, Nasik held that liability to pay interest arises on any amount payable consequent to final assessment under Rule 7(3) of the Central Excise Rules – Accordingly, following the Bombay High Court’s decision, the ... [Read more]

... of telephone exchanges and other items - Purchase orders contained price escalation/de-escalation clauses – Provisional assessments - upon escalation in the price appellants were raising supplementary bills and were immediately paying duty on the basis of the said supplementary bills - Demand of interest prior to finalization of the assessment – HELD – The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CEAT Ltd. vs. CCE&C, Nasik held that liability to pay interest arises on any amount payable consequent to final assessment under Rule 7(3) of the Central Excise Rules – Accordingly, following the Bombay High Court’s decision, the impugned order is set aside and assessee appeal is allowed with consequential relief [Read less]

2015-VIL-365-UTR|VAT |High Court Cases | 01.09.2015

... making Assessment or Reassessment – power under sub-section (12) of Section 32 - Validity of notification extending the period of limitation for completing assessments – subordinate legislation - Existence of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ which enables the State to extend the period of limitation – HELD – It would be clearly opposed to public interest, if for reasons which are extraordinary assessments become barred and the recovery of public revenue also consequently become impermissible - It is in the context of this situation that we must appreciate the import of the words ‘extraordinary circumstances’ under sub-section... [Read more]

... making Assessment or Reassessment – power under sub-section (12) of Section 32 - Validity of notification extending the period of limitation for completing assessments – subordinate legislation - Existence of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ which enables the State to extend the period of limitation – HELD – It would be clearly opposed to public interest, if for reasons which are extraordinary assessments become barred and the recovery of public revenue also consequently become impermissible - It is in the context of this situation that we must appreciate the import of the words ‘extraordinary circumstances’ under sub-section (12) of Section 32 of the Act - ‘extraordinary’ would be something which is not usual, but it need not be something which is completely unheard of or beyond the scope of the previous experience of society - The fairly staggering amount of cases, as also the shortage of staff, strike and, therefore, on a realistic and combined consideration of the circumstances, it cannot be said that there were no extraordinary circumstances, a view taken by the competent authority. It is not a case that there were no materials at all for forming the opinion that there were extraordinary circumstances - in the context of the State of Uttarakhand having been born on 09.11.2000, with the obvious teething problems a new State would be confronted with which includes shortage of staff, number of cases to be dealt with, we cannot hold that it was normal circumstance and that there were no extraordinary circumstances – There is public interest involved in extending the period of limitation - In such circumstances, Court sees no merit in the appeals [Read less]

2015-VIL-458-CESTAT-MUM-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 31.08.2015

... e ground that the goods were exported in December 2007 and refund claim was filed on 23.05.2008 which is beyond the period of ‘sixty days’ as stated in the Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007 - revised limitation period as introduced by Notification No.32/2008 dated 18.11.2008 – Retrospective effect of substitution of ‘60 days’ by the words ‘six months’ in Notification 32/2008-ST for increasing the period of filing the refund claim from ‘60 days’ to ‘6 months’ – HELD - The issue of whether the benefit of filing refund claim within ‘six months’ from the date of last quarter was considered by the Tribunal in the cas... [Read more]

... e ground that the goods were exported in December 2007 and refund claim was filed on 23.05.2008 which is beyond the period of ‘sixty days’ as stated in the Notification No. 41/2007-ST dated 06.10.2007 - revised limitation period as introduced by Notification No.32/2008 dated 18.11.2008 – Retrospective effect of substitution of ‘60 days’ by the words ‘six months’ in Notification 32/2008-ST for increasing the period of filing the refund claim from ‘60 days’ to ‘6 months’ – HELD - The issue of whether the benefit of filing refund claim within ‘six months’ from the date of last quarter was considered by the Tribunal in the case of Essar Steel – The Notification was enlarged by the Board itself by issue of a circular clarifying that the refund claim for the quarter ending June 2008 can be filed upto 31 December 2008 – The word ‘substitution’ has to be treated as existing in the original notification – The impugned order is incorrect and is liable to be set aside – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-365-MAD-ST|SERVICE TAX |High Court Cases | 31.08.2015

... t credit - Outdoor catering services - services provided in the factory for employees of the factory and outward freight services - whether the assessee can utilise the cenvat credit facilities in respect of outdoor catering services, provided in the factory for its employees and outward freight service as input service – HELD – Issue settled in favour of the assessee by following the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CCE Vs Ultratech Cement Ltd. wherein all the contentions raised by the Revenue has been considered in extenso including the definition of 'input service' - The Bombay High Court came to the con... [Read more]

... t credit - Outdoor catering services - services provided in the factory for employees of the factory and outward freight services - whether the assessee can utilise the cenvat credit facilities in respect of outdoor catering services, provided in the factory for its employees and outward freight service as input service – HELD – Issue settled in favour of the assessee by following the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CCE Vs Ultratech Cement Ltd. wherein all the contentions raised by the Revenue has been considered in extenso including the definition of 'input service' - The Bombay High Court came to the conclusion that the decision of the Larger Bench of the CESTAT in the case of CCE V. GTC Industries Ltd is a correct law, however, with a rider that where the cost of the food is borne by the worker, the manufacturer cannot take credit of that part of the service tax which is borne by the consumer - Cenvat Credit has been properly availed in respect of outdoor catering services - Outward freight charges – HELD - Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE V. ABB Ltd., Bangalore which was rendered on the appeal filed by the Department as against the decision of the full Bench of the Tribunal, while answering the issue whether the services availed by a manufacturer for outward transportation of final products from the place of removal should be treated as an input service in terms of Rule 2 (1) (ii) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and thereby enabling the manufacturer to take credit of the service tax on the value of such services – Revenue appeal dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-457-CESTAT-MUM-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 31.08.2015

... empted goods – Exemption to Tractors – The appellant was not in a position to immediately segregate the records of inputs which go into the production of exempted goods and which go into the dutiable goods – Maintenance of separate accounts - showcause notice demanding an amount equal to 8/10% of the total price – HELD – In the present case, the tractors became exempt w.e.f. 9.7.2004. From that date onwards assessee followed the procedure as envisaged under Rule 6(3)(b). They followed the said procedure as it was practically not possible by them to immediately segregate their accounting system in respect of inputs going in... [Read more]

... empted goods – Exemption to Tractors – The appellant was not in a position to immediately segregate the records of inputs which go into the production of exempted goods and which go into the dutiable goods – Maintenance of separate accounts - showcause notice demanding an amount equal to 8/10% of the total price – HELD – In the present case, the tractors became exempt w.e.f. 9.7.2004. From that date onwards assessee followed the procedure as envisaged under Rule 6(3)(b). They followed the said procedure as it was practically not possible by them to immediately segregate their accounting system in respect of inputs going into the dutiable products and exempted products. After working out the details, they put a system in place and w.e.f. 1.9.2004 they switched over to the scheme as envisaged under Rule 6(2) above. There is no provision in the Cenvat Credit Rules or any other provision in the law that before switching over to Rule 6(2), a manufacturer is required to reverse the credit of inputs available in its stores, work in progress and in the finished goods on that date and only after reversing the credit the manufacturer can switch over to Rule 6(2). In the absence of any such prohibition, we are unable to appreciate Revenue’s contention that the appellant is required to pay an amount under Rule 6(3)(b) till 24.9.2004 i.e. the date when they reversed the credit attributable to inputs in its stores, work in progress and on the finished goods as on 31.8.2004 - Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-364-BOM|VAT |High Court Cases | 31.08.2015

... Dismissal of appeal by Tribunal – Ground of dismissal - for want of prosecution or merit – Assessment – Production of records – books of accounts - loss of records in the flood of 2005 – partial submission of records – HELD – The Assessing Officer verified this issue and concluded that the assessee has not submitted any proof of destruction of books in the flood of 2005. It is not as if that flood of 2005 is a disputed fact, but what is destroyed therein and which record belonging to the dealer or which file, is the real issue. That has not been spelt out and that is why the explanation was not found to be acceptable. If ... [Read more]

... Dismissal of appeal by Tribunal – Ground of dismissal - for want of prosecution or merit – Assessment – Production of records – books of accounts - loss of records in the flood of 2005 – partial submission of records – HELD – The Assessing Officer verified this issue and concluded that the assessee has not submitted any proof of destruction of books in the flood of 2005. It is not as if that flood of 2005 is a disputed fact, but what is destroyed therein and which record belonging to the dealer or which file, is the real issue. That has not been spelt out and that is why the explanation was not found to be acceptable. If it was not a bonafide explanation and the matter was not concluded by the First Appellate Authority for want of appearance or for want of prosecution of the appeal but on merits, then, this cannot be said to be an order dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution. The petitioner – appellant has not produced any evidence which can substantiate his claim of destruction of books of accounts. The Assessing Officer, therefore, applied best judgment test in the assessment order and concluded the assessment. It is such exercise of the Assessing Officer which has been upheld. That additionally the petitioner did not evince interest and therefore, remained absent at the hearing or his representative sought time and by raising a plea of absence of inspection of record, does not mean that the order dismisses the appeal for want of prosecution - Once the dismissal of the appeal by the Appellate Authority is not for want of prosecution or for want of attendance but by dealing with the merits of the matter including the claim that there are no records available because of destruction by floods, then, the principle in Apex Court judgement in Balaji Steel Re-Rolling Mills Vs. Commissioner of CE&C can have no application – Writ petition dismissed [Read less]

2015-VIL-456-CESTAT-AHM-CE|CENTRAL EXCISE |CESTAT Cases | 31.08.2015

... Pipes (capital goods) used as replacements in a pipeline used for transportation of natural gas – Denial of credit on the grounds that use of the pipes is not in the factory of manufacture - use of pipes in the manufacture of gas pipeline from the unit of the appellant to the supply point of GAIL – HELD – In the case of Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs CCE&ST, Ahmedabad-III it was that held the credit of pipes from bringing water from a far of source to the factory for use in or relation to the manufacture of finished excisable goods as admissible - The facts of this case are similar to the facts involved in the Torrent case... [Read more]

... Pipes (capital goods) used as replacements in a pipeline used for transportation of natural gas – Denial of credit on the grounds that use of the pipes is not in the factory of manufacture - use of pipes in the manufacture of gas pipeline from the unit of the appellant to the supply point of GAIL – HELD – In the case of Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs CCE&ST, Ahmedabad-III it was that held the credit of pipes from bringing water from a far of source to the factory for use in or relation to the manufacture of finished excisable goods as admissible - The facts of this case are similar to the facts involved in the Torrent case laws – Hence, following the ratio of said caselaw the assessee appeal is allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-363-DEL|VAT |High Court Cases | 31.08.2015

... - Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1975 – Deduction – Deduction in respect of sales made dealers against ST-1 Forms – Denial of deduction on the ground that assessee had been unable to produce the purchasing dealers and it had not established the transfer of property in goods – HELD – The reason for denial is not sustainable in light of the fact that the Assessee had produced documents for the sale of goods and the duly receipted invoices - The AA was unduly influenced by the ST-2 Account filed by the purchasing dealer and the fact that the purchasing dealers were not found in existence at the time of making the remand assessment or... [Read more]

... - Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1975 – Deduction – Deduction in respect of sales made dealers against ST-1 Forms – Denial of deduction on the ground that assessee had been unable to produce the purchasing dealers and it had not established the transfer of property in goods – HELD – The reason for denial is not sustainable in light of the fact that the Assessee had produced documents for the sale of goods and the duly receipted invoices - The AA was unduly influenced by the ST-2 Account filed by the purchasing dealer and the fact that the purchasing dealers were not found in existence at the time of making the remand assessment order - the originals of ST-1 Forms in the name of the Assessee had been produced and the Assessee could not be penalised for any contrary return filed by the purchasing dealers. As regards the existence of the purchasing dealers is concerned, there is no dispute that the said dealers were in existence when the transactions had been effected – The selling dealer would have no duty to examine the correctness of the Form ST-1 submitted; the selling dealer would also not be responsible for any misapplication of goods by the purchasing dealer or failure on the part of the purchasing dealer to maintain the correct records. Clearly, the Assessee could not be held responsible for any discrepancy in the ST-2 Account furnished by the purchasing dealer to the Sales Tax Authorities - the Assessee was not obliged to make any further enquiries or compliance with regard to the goods sold to the purchasing dealers - Under Rule 7(1), the Assessee is required to produce only the copies of the relevant cash memos or bills and a declaration in Form ST-1 duly filled and signed by the purchasing dealers to claim deduction from its taxable turnover. These conditions had been met by the Assessee - The remand assessment order to the extent that it denies the Assessee deduction and raises a consequential demand, is set aside – Assessee appeal allowed [Read less]

2015-VIL-459-CESTAT-DEL-ST|SERVICE TAX |CESTAT Cases | 31.08.2015

... ) to M/s BSNL in the form of erection of towers for which certain items are supplied free of charge by BSNL and certain other items are used by the appellants - what should be the classification of the activities undertaken by the appellants, whether the same should be considered Erection, Commissioning or Installation Service (ECIS) or as works contract service. Period of dispute in all these appeals is 1/5/2006 to 17/3/2008 – HELD - We do not agree with the argument of the appellant that no service tax was attracted on the activities done by them prior to 01/6/2007 as the works contract service was carved out of Services... [Read more]

... ) to M/s BSNL in the form of erection of towers for which certain items are supplied free of charge by BSNL and certain other items are used by the appellants - what should be the classification of the activities undertaken by the appellants, whether the same should be considered Erection, Commissioning or Installation Service (ECIS) or as works contract service. Period of dispute in all these appeals is 1/5/2006 to 17/3/2008 – HELD - We do not agree with the argument of the appellant that no service tax was attracted on the activities done by them prior to 01/6/2007 as the works contract service was carved out of Services of CICS, COCS and ECIS which were subject to service tax even prior to 01/6/2007. Works contract service was specifically born w.e.f. 01/6/2007. As per the provisions contained in Section 66F (2) of the Finance Act, 1994 a specific heading has to be the appropriate classification of a service. The activities of ‘works contract’ undertaken by the appellant is therefore classifiable under ‘works contract service’ w.e.f. 01/6/2007. The same service even if provided under a works contract before 01/6/2007, will be classifiable under Erection, Commissioning or Installation Service (ECIS). A similar view was expressed by five Member Larger Bench in the case of Larsen & Toubro Ltd. vs. CST, Delhi - Extended period - there could be a bonafide belief on the part of the appellant that their activities do not attract service tax before 01/6/2007. Accordingly, it is held that extended period is not invokable in these appeals – Appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed [Read less]