Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Tools on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
By creating an account you can:
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
Rule 4 (5) of Service tax rules, 1994 clearly states that the Superintendent of Central Excise shall after due verification of the application form, grant a certificate of registration in Form ST-2 within seven days from the date of receipt of the application. If the registration certificate is not granted within the said period, the registration applied for shall be deemed to have been granted.
In the case of KaramChand Thaper & Bros. [2009 (7) TMI 715 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] it was held that the deeming provision in Rule 4(5) is applicable to registration granted by the Superintendent of Central Excise only. However, for centralized registration under Rule 4(2) of Service tax rules, 1994, the registration is to be granted by the Commissioner of Service Tax or the Chief Commissioner of Service Tax in whose jurisdiction the premises of the petitioner company, from where centralized billing/accounting is done, is located. There being no time stipulation on the Commissioner of Central Excise to grant centralized registration under sub-rule 2, the provision of deemed registration is not attracted in case of grant of registration by the Commissioner.
There can be no doubt that registration cannot be indefinitely delayed. Registration has to be granted within reasonable time. In view of the circulars referred to by Mr. Poddar, seven days may be considered reasonable time. However, while in case of grant of registration by the Superintendent of Central Excise, the time stipulation of seven days is mandatory under the Rules and its contravention attracts the consequence of deemed registration, in case of the Commissioner, the same time stipulation extended by circulars is only directory. The circulars prescribe appropriate action against officers who delay registration.
Deemed registration applies when the local superintendent delays issuance, but not to centralized registration by the Commissioner. Failure of the Superintendent of Central Excise to issue Form ST-2 within seven days triggers deemed registration; that deeming provision applies only to registrations by the Superintendent and not to centralized registrations granted by the Commissioner, where no statutory time limit exists. Registration must nevertheless be granted within a reasonable time, and administrative circulars treating seven days as reasonable impose directory guidance and accountability but do not create deemed registration for the Commissioner.Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
TaxTMI