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>Delhi HC Dismisses Appeal on Business Auxiliary Services Chargeability; Directs Appeals to SC per Finance Act Section 83.</h1> The Delhi HC dismissed the appellant's challenge to a CESTAT order regarding the chargeability of business auxiliary services under the Finance Act, 1994. ... Classification of service - business of auxiliary service within the meaning of Section 65(19) read with Section 65(105)(zzb) of the Finance Act, 1994 or not - whether the respondent is liable to pay service tax on the amounts received by it from National Highway Authority of India under the contract dated 08.08.2002 between them? - HELD THAT:- This Court is not called upon to examine the appellant’s policy of filing appeals. Since, there is no dispute that the present appeal is not maintainable, the same is dismissed. The Delhi High Court, comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, dismissed an appeal filed by the appellant against an order dated 23.12.2011 by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The appeal questioned the chargeability of a business auxiliary service under Section 65(19) read with Section 65(105)(zzb) of the Finance Act, 1994, and the subsequent liability of the respondent to pay service tax on amounts received from the National Highway Authority of India.The court referenced a precedent from the case Principal Commissioner Goods and Service Tax South v. Premium Real-estate Developers, emphasizing that issues regarding the chargeability of service tax should be appealed to the Supreme Court, not the High Court, as per Section 83 of the Finance Act and Sections 35G and 35L(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. This position is further supported by Circular No. 334/15/2014-TRU from the Central Board of Excise and Customs. Consequently, the appeal was deemed not maintainable in the High Court and was dismissed. The court noted that this dismissal does not preclude the appellant from pursuing other legal remedies.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
