1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>CESTAT BANGALORE grants stay in service tax case, waives pre-deposit & halts recovery pending appeal</h1> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT BANGALORE granted the stay petition in the case involving service tax and penalties. The Tribunal found in favor of the ... Waiver of pre-deposit - abatement under N/N. 32/04 - denial of abatement on the ground that there is no endorsement on the consignment notes that there is non-availment of inputs/capital goods stage credit - Held that: - the applicant as a person who has received the services of the goods transport agency could not have taken the credit of the capital goods/inputs - the applicant has made but a prima facie case for the waiver of the pre-deposit of the amounts confirmed by the lower authorities - Application for waiver of the amounts involved is allowed and recovery thereof stayed till the disposal of the appeal. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT BANGALORE, in the case of Shri M.V. Ravindran and P. Karthikeyan, JJ., heard a stay petition against the waiver of pre-deposit amounts including service tax, penalties under Sections 78, 76, and 77. The service tax confirmation issue arose from the lack of endorsement on consignment notes regarding non-availment of Modvat/Cenvat credit. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities denied abatement due to this reason, but the applicant, as a service recipient, could not have taken such credit. The Tribunal noted that the issue was resolved in favor of the appellant by previous decisions, allowing the waiver of the pre-deposit amounts and staying recovery until the appeal's conclusion. The order was pronounced and dictated in open court.