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 orders re-examination of tax demands & credit denial, directs pre-deposit for sustainable classifications</h1> <h3>DHL Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Thane-II</h3> DHL Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Thane-II - 2015 (38) S.T.R. 620 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues Involved:Service tax demand confirmation, CENVAT credit denial, Break bulk fee taxation, Freight rebate taxation, Airline commission taxation, Airline incentive taxation, CCX fee taxation, Inadmissible credit demand.CENVAT Credit Denial:The appellant challenged the denial of CENVAT credit amounting to Rs. 2.85 crore, arguing that the cap of 20% applies to service tax payable, not credit availed. The appellant contended that post 01/04/2008, the credit could have been utilized. Referring to a CBEC circular, it was stated that only interest on excess credit utilization could be demanded, not the entire credit. The Tribunal directed a re-examination by the adjudicating authority in light of the circular.Break Bulk Fee and Freight Rebate Taxation:The appellant cited a Tribunal decision in their favor, asserting that the demand for service tax on break bulk fee and freight rebate was unsustainable. The Tribunal directed a re-examination by the adjudicating authority to consider the issue in line with the previous decision.Airline Commission, Airline Incentive, and CCX Fee Taxation:Regarding demands under Business Auxiliary Service for airline commission, airline incentive, and CCX fee, the Tribunal found the classification prima facie sustainable as services rendered to promote carriers' business. The appellant was directed to make a pre-deposit towards the confirmed service tax dues for these items.Inadmissible Credit Demand:The Tribunal directed a fresh examination by the adjudicating authority to determine if the procedural lapses affected the substantive benefit to the appellant. The appellant was instructed to make a pre-deposit towards confirmed service tax dues for certain items and comply with the adjudicating authority's directives.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented, Tribunal's observations, and directions given for each matter under consideration.
TaxTMI 