Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The appellant provided two services - servicing of motor vehicles and running an amusement park. The amusement park service was exempt from service tax until 1.6.2015. After that, it became taxable but the appellant did not pay service tax, claiming it was covered under the negative list or exemption. However, the tribunal held that the amusement park service was not covered under the negative list or exemption after 1.6.2015 and hence taxable. Regarding the time limitation, the tribunal held that since the appellant had a bona fide belief of non-taxability and the revenue did not scrutinize the returns, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. The demand for short payment of service tax under repairs and maintenance services was also time-barred. The tribunal set aside the confirmed demand of Rs. 72,94,797/- towards reversal of CENVAT credit on merits, relying on court rulings that revenue cannot demand reversal without asking for proportionate reversal. The total confirmed demand of Rs. 1,73,60,105/- was set aside due to limitation. The appeal was allowed.
The appellant provided two services - servicing of motor vehicles and running an amusement park. The amusement park service was exempt from service tax until 1.6.2015. After that, it became taxable but the appellant did not pay service tax, claiming it was covered under the negative list or exemption. However, the tribunal held that the amusement park service was not covered under the negative list or exemption after 1.6.2015 and hence taxable. Regarding the time limitation, the tribunal held that since the appellant had a bona fide belief of non-taxability and the revenue did not scrutinize the returns, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. The demand for short payment of service tax under repairs and maintenance services was also time-barred. The tribunal set aside the confirmed demand of Rs. 72,94,797/- towards reversal of CENVAT credit on merits, relying on court rulings that revenue cannot demand reversal without asking for proportionate reversal. The total confirmed demand of Rs. 1,73,60,105/- was set aside due to limitation. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
