TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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>High Court of Madras Rules on Revenue Appeals Against Tribunal Order on Service Tax</h1> The High Court of Madras addressed appeals by the Revenue challenging a common order by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The ... Monetary limit involved in appeal - on account of the monetary limits in these appeals, which are lesser than the threshold limit fixed by the Board's circular dated 11.7.2018, she seeks permission to withdraw the appeals - appeal dismissed as withdrawn. Issues:1. Challenge to the common order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal2. Substantial questions of law raised in the appealsAnalysis:The High Court of Madras dealt with appeals filed by the Revenue challenging a common order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeals were admitted based on substantial questions of law raised. The first issue revolved around the timing of service tax liability on reverse charge related to legal fees paid to a foreign service provider. The Hon'ble CESTAT was questioned for holding that the liability was taxable only from 01.09.2009, despite the Supreme Court's declaration that the liability commenced from 18.04.2006 under Section 66A. The second issue concerned the remand of the case by CESTAT for re-qualification of service tax liability, excluding legal fees paid to the foreign service provider. The third issue focused on the deletion of mandatory penalties under Section 76, 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, by CESTAT, despite deliberate omission and evasion of service tax payment. The fourth issue questioned the imposition of equal penalty for deliberate evasion of service tax payment, as invoked in the Show Cause Notice in the remand cases.The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant presented a communication to the Court stating that due to monetary limits in the appeals being lesser than the threshold set by the Board's circular, permission was sought to withdraw the appeals. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn, and the substantial questions of law raised were left open for future consideration. No costs were imposed in this regard.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
