Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

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 / RSS

2012 (10) TMI 793

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ranites Pvt. Ltd. engaged the services of "commission agents" abroad for procuring of export orders and paid commission to the agents for the services rendered. Vide provisions of Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994, the recipient is liable to discharge service tax liability in a case where services were received from abroad and the service provider has no office in India. Accordingly, under the said provisions, the appellants were liable to discharge service tax liability. The appellants had paid a commission of Rs. 30,73,751/- to the foreign service provider for the year 2006-07, according to the audited balance sheet but this fact was not informed to the department. The department noticed that as per the ledger accounts maintained by th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se notice was issued for the additional amount after a lapse of more than one year. She further submits that they had no intention to evade payment of service tax and therefore, prays for waiver of pre-deposit. 4. The learned Superintendent (AR) appearing for the Revenue vehemently contests these arguments. She submits that the appellants had made a wrong entry in their ledger accounts and on this basis, the first show-cause notice was issued. When the error was detected by the department, the appellant had confirmed that the higher amount indicated in the balance sheet was the correct commission amount paid to the foreign service provider. The appellant had suppressed these information from the department and therefore, the extended ....