Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2011 (8) TMI 273

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a Gutkha (containing tobacco) under the trade marks Rajshree , Rajshee , Supreme , Safal , Saffronic , Madhuban and Kamla Pasand . The Revenue made out a case that the main Respondent, M/s Kamla Kant & Co., should have paid Service Tax for the remuneration received for allowing M/s K.P. Pan Flavours (P) Ltd. to use their brand name. The second Respondent in this case is the partner of M/s Kamla Kant & Co., who signed the agreement with M/s K.P. Pan Flavours (P) Ltd. on behalf of M/s Kamla Kant & Co. and the third Respondent is Shri Dilip Kumar Srivastava, Director of M/s K.P. Pan Flavours (P) Ltd. who signed the agreement on behalf of the Company. This dispute is for the period 1.7.2003 to 31.12.2004.   2. Revenue issued a Show Caus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ue is that all the four ingredients of Section 65(47) are satisfied in the case of service rendered by the main Respondent to M/s K.P. Pan Flavours (P) Ltd. and therefore they issued a Show Cause Notice demanding Service Tax amounting to Rs.22,30,742/- along with appropriate interest. Further, penalties under Section 75, 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 also were proposed. The Show Cause Notice was adjudicated by the Adjudicating Authority confirming the demand proposed in the Show Cause Notice along with interest. Further, penalties under Section 75, 76, 77 and 78 were imposed. Aggrieved by the order, the Respondents filed an Appeal with the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) gave a finding that in the case of impugne....