Just a moment...

⚠✕
❮ Top
☎ Help
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Keyword Search :
AI Tools : New
Ask tax questions in natural language. Powered by AI trained on the TaxTMI legal database. Use AI Tools ➞
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
╳
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
✕
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
❮ Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - Adv. Search ❯
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text ❯
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Law:
---- All Laws----❯
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ---- ❯
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    Case LawsService Tax
    Quashing Show-Cause Notice Due to Unexplained Delay: Upholding Fair Adjudication
    Case LawsService Tax
    Navigating the Taxation Labyrinth: The Supreme Court's Guidance on Transfer of Right to Use Goods
    Case LawsService Tax
    The Intersection of International Business and Service Tax: The Export of Services Under Indian Serv...
    Case LawsService Tax
    Analyzing the Implications of Delay in Tax Adjudication: A Case Study
    Case LawsService Tax
    Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM): Service Tax Implications for Exporters: A Legal Perspective on Forei...
    Case LawsService Tax
    Legal Nuances in CENVAT Credit Rules and Extended Limitation Periods: A Detailed Analysis
    Case LawsService Tax
    Cenvat Credit - Input Service Distributors and the Extended Period of Limitation in Service Tax Law:...
    Case LawsService Tax
    Principles of Natural Justice upheld by the Court/s.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Foreclosure of the right to reply to a notice by the Noticee is a violation of principles of natural...
    Case LawsService Tax
    Whether the vessels or ships that are afloat are not goods and immovable property? - CESTAT says Yes...
    Case LawsService Tax
    Adjustment of excess paid service tax – rule 6(3) of STR, 1994
    Case LawsService Tax
    Whether components of a composite transaction amounting to supply of labour/rendition of service(s),...
❮
❯
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

    Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

    NOTE:

    Open Link
    Notes
    All› Service Tax
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    Case LawsService Tax
    Quashing Show-Cause Notice Due to Unexplained Delay: Upholding Fair Adjudication
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication: unexplained delays undermine natural justice and invalidate further administrative steps.
    The challenge contested whether inordinate and unexplained delay in adjudication violated the principles of natural justice, causing serious prejudice by impairing the petitioner's ability to defend. The court found the respondents' explanations-frequent changes in adjudicating officers and accommodation of co-noticees-insufficient, applied precedent that excessive unexplained delay vitiates proceedings, and emphasized the duty of authorities to conduct timely adjudication or supply adequate justification for delay.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Navigating the Taxation Labyrinth: The Supreme Court's Guidance on Transfer of Right to Use Goods
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer of right to use goods: contracts retaining operational control are service arrangements, not deemed sales under VAT.
    The issue is whether supply agreements for cranes, trailers and tank trucks amount to a transfer of the right to use goods under the deemed sale provision. Applying the five BSNL tests-availability of goods, consensus on identity, transferee's legal right to use, exclusivity of use, and non transferability by owner-the contracts failed to meet the criteria. Contractors retained possession, crew, fuel, maintenance and liability, and transferees had only permissive use without effective control, so the arrangements were services, not deemed sales under VAT/sales tax.
    Case LawsService Tax
    The Intersection of International Business and Service Tax: The Export of Services Under Indian Serv...
    Show AI Summary
    Export of service: services benefiting a foreign recipient's overseas business can qualify as exports, affecting service tax liability.
    Whether commissions earned by an Indian sub agent for procuring orders for a foreign principal qualify as export of service under the Export of Service Rules 2005 depends on the destination based consumption tax concept: the place where benefit accrues and the location of the service recipient determine export character, and services benefiting a foreign recipient's overseas business that meet the Rules' conditions are treated as exports and outside domestic service tax.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Analyzing the Implications of Delay in Tax Adjudication: A Case Study
    Show AI Summary
    Delay in tax adjudication undermines statutory timeframe and can violate principles of natural justice, affecting taxpayers' rights.
    Inordinate delay in adjudicating a service tax show cause notice raised whether such delay contravened the statutory timeframe under Section 73 and violated principles of natural justice; the delay of about a decade, despite an early response by the taxpayer, was characterised as inordinate and prejudicial, inconsistent with the statutory aim of prompt determination and established precedents requiring proceedings to conclude within a reasonable period.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM): Service Tax Implications for Exporters: A Legal Perspective on Forei...
    Show AI Summary
    Reverse charge mechanism: exporter not liable for foreign bank charges when Indian bank is the direct service recipient.
    The core issue is whether an exporter is liable under the Reverse Charge Mechanism for foreign bank charges deducted from export proceeds when those charges are imposed on and paid by an Indian intermediary bank. The Tribunal's analysis focuses on the definition of service recipient and territorial scope, concluding that the direct recipient-the Indian bank-is the party liable to discharge service tax while the exporter, as an indirect beneficiary without direct dealings with the foreign bank, is not subject to reverse charge.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Legal Nuances in CENVAT Credit Rules and Extended Limitation Periods: A Detailed Analysis
    Show AI Summary
    Extended limitation period: requires proof of fraud or wilful suppression; mere self-assessment errors are insufficient.
    The tribunal held that invocation of the extended period of limitation for recovery of irregularly availed CENVAT credit requires affirmative grounds such as fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts; mere incorrect self-assessment, audit disagreement, or discovery during audit does not establish the necessary intent to evade, and therefore demands beyond the normal limitation period (except conceded amounts) could not be sustained.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Cenvat Credit - Input Service Distributors and the Extended Period of Limitation in Service Tax Law:...
    Show AI Summary
    Cenvat credit validity vs procedural lapses: extended limitation requires evidence of fraud or suppression to apply.
    Whether a PSU could claim CENVAT credit through its Head Office functioning as an Input Service Distributor despite documentation lapses, and whether the Department could invoke the extended period of limitation were examined. The focus is on reconciling substantive receipt of services with procedural compliance, and on the requisite showing of fraud, collusion, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts to justify extending limitation beyond the normal period; mere delay without such evidence does not suffice.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Principles of Natural Justice upheld by the Court/s.
    Show AI Summary
    Principles of natural justice require hearing before rejecting an SVLDRS declaration, prompting fresh reconsideration with a speaking order.
    An administrative rejection of an application under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 for alleged ineligibility was found to have failed procedural fairness by denying notice and hearing. The court required the Designated Committee to reconsider the declaration after affording the applicant a hearing with prior intimation and to issue a reasoned speaking order reflecting the scheme's remedial purpose.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Foreclosure of the right to reply to a notice by the Noticee is a violation of principles of natural...
    Show AI Summary
    Right to be heard: foreclosure of the right to reply violates natural justice, requiring fresh adjudication with hearing.
    Foreclosure of the noticee's opportunity to respond to a notice breaches the right to be heard and principles of natural justice. Where the adjudicating authority has foreclosed the reply, the matter should be returned to the original authority for fresh adjudication after the noticee is given opportunity to reply and to present factual and legal submissions, and after the authority issues notice of intent and completes adjudication with procedural fairness.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Whether the vessels or ships that are afloat are not goods and immovable property? - CESTAT says Yes...
    Show AI Summary
    Classification of floating vessels as immovable property may exclude their sale from GST law taxation.
    The tribunal held that ships and vessels afloat are not 'goods' but are akin to immovable property because they cannot be severed from the waters; ships are goods only before launch, during breaking up, or when specifically the subject of a sale. As immovable property lies outside the GST domain under the constitutional allocation, this classification raises the question whether GST would apply to sale or supply of floating vessels-a point pending higher judicial scrutiny.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Adjustment of excess paid service tax – rule 6(3) of STR, 1994
    Show AI Summary
    Adjustment of excess service tax permitted as alternative to refund under liberal interpretation of procedural rules.
    A liberal reading of Rule 6(3) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 permits adjustment of excess service tax paid against future liabilities when facts show an excess payment, rather than restricting the assessee solely to a refund claim, consistent with constitutional limits on taxation and the Revenue's concession of excess payment.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Whether components of a composite transaction amounting to supply of labour/rendition of service(s),...
    Show AI Summary
    Service elements in works contracts taxable when classifiable under construction or erection services, not limited to a new label.
    Service elements within a composite works contract that correspond in nature to Commercial or Industrial Construction Service, Construction of Complex Service or Erection, Commissioning or Installation Service are taxable under those service heads; such service elements need not be classified exclusively under the subsequently inserted sub clause, and levy under the existing defined service categories is proper based on the substantive character of the activities.

    TMI Notes

    All› Service Tax
    Back

    All TMI Notes

    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
      No Records Found

      TMI Notes

      Home› TMI Notes › Service Tax › Case-Laws › Category › This
      Back

      All TMI Notes

      whatsappJoin Channel
      Showing Results for : Reset Filters
      Service Tax

      Foreclosure of the right to reply to a notice by the Noticee is a violation of principles of natural justice/right to be heard.

      31 May, 2022

      Contents
      Acts
      Plus +
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Print Options

      2022 (5) TMI 1398 - CESTAT MUMBAI

      Foreclosure of the right to reply to a notice by the noticee is a violation of principles of natural justice/right to be heard.

      The jethmal case, the issue arose from Sea Customs Act, 1878 which did not have a specific provision for issue of notice as exists in the Central Excise Act, 1944.

      In this case the principles of natural justice have been violated as the adjudicating authority had in fact taken away (foreclosed) the right of the noticee to reply to the notice and to present his stance/position on facts and law before the court.

      Thus the noticee was deprived a right of fair hearing and the matter was remanded back to the original authority for fresh adjudication after the appellant-noticee would take up, reply to the notice and present his version. 

      Thus accordingly the illegality was cured/rectified and the matter proposed to be decided on merits  by the original authority after giving the appellant-noticee on notice of intent to take up, and complete, the adjudication process. Appeal allowed by way of remanding back the matter to the original authority.

       

      Full Text:

      2022 (5) TMI 1398 - CESTAT MUMBAI

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax
      Next ➔