Supreme Court of India dismisses appeal, upholds original decision, and disposes of all pending applications without changes.Levy of Service tax alongwith interest and penalty - Business Auxiliary services - service of procurement of space on the vessel - It was held by CESTAT Mumbai that Section 65(19) ibid will not address these independent principal-to-principal transactions of the appellant and, with the space so purchased being allocable only by the appellant, the shipping line fails in description as client whose services are promoted or marketed. Therefore, the demands, with interest thereon, and penalties are ... ... ... Title: Supreme Court of India dismisses appeal

Judges: Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta

Decision: Delay condoned. The court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Appeal dismissed. Pending applications disposed of. Levy of Service tax alongwith interest and penalty - Business Auxiliary services - service of procurement of space on the vessel - It was held by CESTAT Mumbai that Section 65(19) ibid will not address these independent principal-to-principal transactions of the appellant and, with the space so purchased being allocable only by the appellant, the shipping line fails in description as client whose services are promoted or marketed. Therefore, the demands, with interest thereon, and penalties are set aside. HELD THAT:- This Court is of the opinion that the order impugned does not call for interference. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND CE BELAPUR Versus M/s EMU LINE PVT. LTD.
Service Tax
2023 (2) TMI 1155 - SC Order - 2023 (72) G. S. T. L. 443 (SC), [2023] 115 G S.T.R. 85 (SC)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA - SC
Dated:- 27-2-2023
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1479 OF 2023 (Arising out of C. A. Dy. No. 6706 of 2023) - -
Service Tax
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA For the Petitioner : Mr. N. Venkatraman, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Ms. Shagun Thakur, Adv. Mr. Udai Khanna, Adv. Ms. Vishakha, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Das, Adv. ORDER Delay condoned. This Court is of the opinion that the order impugned does not call for interference. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. All Pending applications are disposed of.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, Orders