AIT-2008-11-CESTAT
Great Lakes Institute of Management Ltd. Vs CCE, Chennai

Not for Profit Organization is not a commercial concern , not liable to service tax as “commercial training or coaching

AIT-2008-12-CESTAT
Carona Plus Industries Ltd. & Others Vs CCE, Kanpur/Jaipur-I & Vice Versa

The appellants, while paying service tax on GTA Service availed in connection with removal of their final product from factory, were doing so on an “output service” , they were entitled to utilize, for payment of service tax on such service, credit of the tax paid on the inputs GTA service availed by them in connection with receipt of inputs into their factory

AIT-2008-13-CESTAT
ACME Tele Power Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE, Chandigarh

AIT-2008-14-CESTAT
Modforge  Ltd Vs. CCE, Chennai

Duty on additional amounts subsequently received cannot be treated to be duty short levied on the goods at the time of clearance of the goods.  The demand of interest is not sustainable.

AIT-2008-15-CESTAT
Alpump Ltd Vs CCE, Chennai

Whether non-payment of duty was on account of suppression of facts or not and whether the subsequent payment of duty was before issuance of show cause notice or thereafter, any penalty is not imposable under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, provided the duty was paid before the conclusion of the adjudication proceedings

Merely credit was taken and not utilized,recovery of interest is not sustainable

Steel straps were used for securing the goods dispatched for export can be considered as packing material and will be covered under the category of “inputs” for availment of CENVAT Credit

Cenvat credit availed during the period  01/01/2005 to 15/06/2005 on the basis of TR-6 challans, which were used for payment of Service Tax on the services received from GTA, is admissible 

Prior to 1.1.2005, a service receiver from the non-resident service provider was not liable to pay the service tax

Under Service Tax law, no obligation was cast upon the recipient of the service to make any deduction from the amounts payable by way of consideration

In respect of taxable services provided by a non-resident or  from outside India,  such service was notified in the Official Gazette, only on 31-12-2004 with the issue of Notification 36/2004-S.T. which came into force on 1-1-2005, service tax is therefore not leviable for the period prior to 1-1-2005

Clause (iv) of Rule 2(d) created a liability on every recipient of taxable service in relation to any taxable service provided by non-resident, liable to pay tax

The question of leviability of Service Tax on the service recipient prior to 1-1-2005 has to be decided by a Larger Bench

Service Tax on construction of residential complex-CBEC Circular No. 96/7/2007-ST dated 23.8.2007 is by way of clarification of the law-it will apply retrospectively

Even where a minimum penalty is prescribed, the authority has discretion to impose a lesser penalty-the amount mentioned in Rule 173Q(1) of the 1944 Rules or Rule 25(1) of the 2002 Rules is the maximum, and not the minimum

Back office services,lead tax services, international assignment services, tax services etc.would not amount to Information Technology Service , therefore, they are not excluded from the scope of Business Auxiliary Service which is taxable. Once it is held that they are taxable,they are entitled for the refund of the credit

Appellants are entitled to the benefit of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, whereunder the penal provisions of Sections 76 & 78 are not to be invoked against a person who failed to pay service tax within the prescribed time due to reasonable cause

Service tax is not leviable in the category of "Consulting Engineer's Service" on the technical know-how fee paid by the appellants to their foreign collaborators

Once the foreign suppliers export the goods to India and receive their payments, a commission is paid to the appellant. the services rendered have been exported in terms of Rule 3(2) of the Export of Services Rules, 2005

Out of pocket expenses reimbursed on actual basis are not includable in the value of the Service Tax

Appellant constructed a multi-storied building and entered into an agreement with their customers for sale of the flat before starting the construction-liable for Service tax

Larger Bench - the statutorily determined value under Rule 8 would apply at all stages and for all purposes whenever the question of ascertaining the value of goods in non-sale transactions arises

On assignment, the assignee is to be treated as the brand name owner, even when the assignment deed is not registered- the benefit of SSI Notification claimed is admissible to the appellants

the show cause notice does not contain any allegation that the relationship between Hagel and Glaxo was not on principal to principal basis.  Further, even factually the relationship between the two is on principal to principal basis- goods have to be assessed on the basis of the price of the manufacturer to the brand name owner and not on the basis of brand name owner's wholesale price

Just because the storage period of free sale sugar had to be extended at the behest of the Government of India, neither the Appellant Sugar Mills become “storage or warehouse keeper” nor the Government become their client. Storage can not be treated as, providing “Storage and warehousing service” to the Government of India

When a cab operator provides his cab with a driver to his client on demand for going from one place to another and charges him on per kilometer basis or a lump sum amount based on distance, as fixed with the client and control of the vehicle always remains with the cab operator/driver, he is providing transport service and this activity would be outside the purview of the entry "rent a cab operator's service"

Transfer of right to use a patented technology and a brand name is IPR service, which became taxable w.e.f. 10/09/04 only, while the period of dispute in this case is 17/1/03 to 31/03/04. We, therefore, hold that the Appellants have not received any taxable service and the impugned order upholding the service tax demand against the Appellant and imposing penalty on them is not sustainable

“Anardana” is classifiable under sub-heading 12099990 as “other seeds for sowing”in the Customs tariff , and not as “other dried fruits” under sub-heading 08134090.

The zinc dross, which is freely importable, is the zinc dross conforming to ISRI code scrub, seal, seam and shelf covered by EXIM code 79020010. The zinc dross, other than that conforming of ISRI code scrub, seam, seal and shelf is covered EXIM code 79020090 and the same is restricted for import

Availability of the input credit in respect of the plastic crates is either as the capital goods or as input

Custom Duty chargeable on the inputs used in the production of non-excisable goods cleared to DTA-has to be calculated as per the provisions of the Notification, as it existed during that period

Service tax is not leviable on the payments received by them from ICICI Bank by way of reimbursements of expenses. Therefore, the demand of differential service tax raised by the Commissioner on the appellants in respect of Business Auxiliary Service rendered by them to M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. during the periods of dispute cannot be sustained

The expenses incurred on account of reimbursable  expenses shall not form part of the value of the taxable services