The Hon'ble CESTAT, New Delhi in M/s. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax [Service Tax Appeal No. 50567 of 2019, decided on December 22, 2020]set aside the order holding that the amount received towards pen
The Hon'ble CESTAT Bangalore, in M/s Target Corporation India Pvt Ltd v. C.C.E., Bangalore [Service Tax Appeal No. 20459 of 2016 decided on January 19, 2021] set aside the order passed by the Commissioner for demand of differential Service tax amount
By way of the present petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge a communication dated 25.11.2020/01.12.2020 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition), by which the bank account of the petitioner in the respondent no.3-Bank (“the Bank”) has been attached by
This appeal filed by the Revenue is against the Order-in-Original No.38/Commr/BOL/13 dated December 19, 2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Bolpur, whereby the Commissioner was pleased to drop the proceedings initiated
Facts of the case in brief are that the appellant is a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) engaged in providing network management and other services to their clients. They also avail the benefit of CENVAT Credit as per Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR, 20
The Appellant, an owner of a cinema hall called ‘Golcha Cinema’ and engaged in the business of exhibiting films in this theatre, has assailed the order dated January 25, 2016 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi1 that confirms t
The issue involved in the matter is that whether the provisions of Rule 6 (3) of CCR, 2004 is applicable to the facts of this case or not?
Both the assessee and the Department are in appeal against the impugned de novo Order dated 25.03.2009 passed by the learned Commissioner, Central Excise, Dibrugarh, whereby the demand of Service Tax of Rs.2,63,36,665/- has been confirmed under the c
The Hon’ble HC, Madras in the matter of GE T & D India Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise [W.P. Nos. 35728 to 35734 of 2016 and WMP. Nos. 30704 to 30710 of 2016 dated November 7, 2019] held that service tax is not leviable on the paym
Whether handling portion and maintenance including incineration facilities by one party on behalf of another is in the nature of providing 'Storage and Warehousing Services' falling under Section 65(105)(zza) of the Finance Act, 1994 (“the Finance Ac
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English