TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Service Tax Judgment: Levy of Rs.88,72,130 confirmed with interest & penalties. Extended period scrutiny. Pre-deposit waiver granted.</h1> <h3>M/s GE Capital Transportation Financial Services Limited Versus CCE & ST, Panchkula</h3> M/s GE Capital Transportation Financial Services Limited Versus CCE & ST, Panchkula - TMI Issues: Total levy confirmation, under remittance of service tax, consideration for banking and financial services, cheque bouncing charges, foreclosure charges, operating lease/hire purchase transactions, unauthorised utilisation of cenvat credit, extended period invocation, exemption notification applicability.1. Total Levy Confirmation: The judgment confirms a total levy of Rs.88,72,130/- along with interest and penalties for alleged under remittance of service tax covering the period from April 2006 to March 2008. The adjudication order passed by the Commissioner confirmed the levy on various components such as check bouncing charges, foreclosure charges, and consideration received from operating lease/hire purchase transactions.2. Consideration for Banking and Financial Services: The appellant's defences regarding the nature of cheque bouncing charges, foreclosure charges, and consideration from lease/hire purchase transactions were negated by the adjudicating authority. The appellant argued that these charges do not fall within the taxable issue of banking and financial services, citing certain precedents.3. Unauthorised Utilisation of Cenvat Credit: The judgment mentions the levy of interest on alleged unauthorised utilisation of cenvat credit, amounting to Rs.1,56,247/-. The appellant undertakes to pre-deposit this amount while reserving the right to challenge it during the appeal hearing.4. Exemption Notification Applicability: Regarding operating lease/hire purchase transactions, the judgment notes that Notification No. 4/2006-ST exempted 90% of the service tax on financial leasing services. The appellant claimed this exemption, but the adjudicating authority failed to address it properly, leading to an incorrect assessment of the tax liability on these transactions.5. Extended Period Invocation: The judgment questions the justification for invoking the extended period for initiating proceedings beyond the normal limitation period under Section 73 of the Act. It grants a waiver of pre-deposit and stays further proceedings for recovery of the adjudicated liability, subject to the appellant remitting a specified amount within a given timeframe.6. Pre-Deposit and Stay of Proceedings: The judgment grants a waiver of pre-deposit and stays all further proceedings for recovery of the adjudicated liability on the condition that the appellant remits a specified amount within four weeks. Failure to comply would result in the dismissal of the appeal for lack of pre-deposit.7. Disposal of Stay Application: The judgment notes the disposal of the stay application and the rejection of miscellaneous applications as infractuous, indicating that the appellant did not pursue these applications further. Compliance reporting deadline is set for a specific date.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
