TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether the retrospective amendments brought in by the Finance Act, 2000 made service tax payable for the period in question, and (ii) whether the Commissioner's review order suffered from any legal infirmity or violation of natural justice.
Issue (i): whether the retrospective amendments brought in by the Finance Act, 2000 made service tax payable for the period in question.
Analysis: Sections 116 and 117 of the Finance Act, 2000 were treated as retrospectively validating the levy of service tax for the relevant period. On that basis, the liability to service tax was held to have arisen for the period from 16-11-1997 to 2-6-1998, along with interest on delayed payment.
Conclusion: The retrospective levy was held to be valid and enforceable against the assessee.
Issue (ii): whether the Commissioner's review order suffered from any legal infirmity or violation of natural justice.
Analysis: The order passed in review under Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994 was upheld as a valid exercise of power after the retrospective amendment. The Tribunal found no legal or factual infirmity in the Commissioner's decision, and the challenge based on lack of opportunity and alleged illegality was not accepted.
Conclusion: The review order was held to be legally sustainable and the plea of natural justice violation failed.
Final Conclusion: The demand of service tax and interest was sustained, and the appeal was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a later retrospective amendment validly imposes tax liability for an earlier period, a review order based on that amendment is sustainable and the levy can be enforced with consequential interest.
TaxTMI 
