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>Virtual Court examines service tax levy despite omission in GST Act</h1> <h3>Md. Baharul Islam Versus The Union of India, The Commissioner GST And Central Excise, The Deputy Commissioner GST And Central Excise Guwahati</h3> The Court conducted proceedings through a Virtual Court to address the power of the department to levy service tax under Chapter-V of the Finance Act, ... Jurisdiction - power of the department to proceed for levy of service tax under Chapter-V of the Finance Act, 1994 inspite of the same being omitted by Section 173 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - Clause 29(h) read with Clause 13 of the Notification No.25/2012-Service Tax dated 20th June, 2012 - HELD THAT:- The matter is fixed on 12.06.2020, on which date Mr. Keyal will produce the connected records pertaining to the petitioner in original. List accordingly. Issues:1. Power of the department to proceed for levy of service tax under Chapter-V of the Finance Act, 1994 despite its omission by Section 173 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.2. Exemption from levy of service tax under Notification No.25/2012-Service Tax dated 20th June, 2012.Analysis:Issue 1:The Court conducted proceedings through a Virtual Court to ensure physical distancing. The petitioner's counsel referred to a previous judgment in the case of Laxmi Narayan Sahu and Others vs. Union of India, which addressed the power of the department to levy service tax under Chapter-V of the Finance Act, 1994 despite its omission by Section 173 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that even if the power of levy is deemed to continue under the 'omitted' provisions, they are exempt from service tax under Clause 29(h) read with Clause 13 of Notification No.25/2012-Service Tax.Issue 2:The respondent's counsel requested to produce connected records in original before the Court on the next date of argument, emphasizing that the affidavit on record dealt with the power of levy of service tax and not the merit of the case. The Court scheduled the matter for further hearing on a specific date for the respondent to present the necessary records. The case will proceed accordingly on the next hearing date for a detailed examination of the connected records.This analysis outlines the key points discussed in the judgment regarding the power of the department to levy service tax and the petitioner's claim for exemption under the relevant notification. The Court's decision is pending further examination of the connected records, indicating a thorough review of the case before a final judgment is reached.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
