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>Tribunal rules on service tax arrears and liability, considering timely payments and specific circumstances.</h1> <h3>Hafeez Contractor Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai</h3> Hafeez Contractor Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai - TMI Issues:1. Disputed arrears of service tax payment2. Service tax liability on bills raised before 16/10/983. Incorrectly computed service tax liabilityDisputed Arrears of Service Tax Payment:The appellant had paid service tax of Rs. 24,43,782 before the show-cause notice was issued. The High Court had granted time until 31/05/2001 to discharge the tax liability without penalty. The Tribunal found that the appellant had complied with this directive and should not be penalized. The penalties under Section 76 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 were set aside as the appellant had paid the tax and interest before the due date set by the High Court. The Tribunal invoked Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 to support its decision to waive the penalties.Service Tax Liability on Bills Raised Before 16/10/98:The appellant claimed that certain bills totaling Rs. 7,83,241 were for services rendered before 16/10/1998 and thus not subject to service tax. However, the Tribunal noted that the appellant failed to provide concrete evidence that these services were indeed rendered before the taxable period. As a result, the Tribunal upheld the service tax liability of Rs. 7,83,241 along with interest. The appellant had pre-deposited the entire service tax liability and an additional amount, which was to be adjusted accordingly.Incorrectly Computed Service Tax Liability:Regarding the incorrectly computed service tax liability of Rs. 91,444, the Tribunal found that the revenue authorities had erred in calculating the tax based on the amount received by the appellant. The Tribunal clarified that the received amount should be considered as a cum tax amount, leading to the dismissal of the demand for service tax of Rs. 91,444. Consequently, interest and penalties related to this demand were also set aside.In conclusion, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal by setting aside penalties for the disputed arrears of service tax payment, upholding the service tax liability on bills raised before 16/10/98, and dismissing the incorrectly computed service tax liability. The appellant's compliance with tax payments and the specific circumstances surrounding each issue were crucial factors in the Tribunal's decision-making process.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
