Services rendered by mandap keepers as caterer would also be liable to service tax - food charges collected from customers includible in value for discharging ST – Pre-deposit ordered: CESTAT
MUMBAI, APRIL 17, 2013: THE appellant is registered with the department under the category of ‘Mandap Keeper Service'. While rendering ‘Mandap Keeper Services' they were also providing catering services. However, they split the charges for the services rendered into two parts. One was for ‘hall charges' which was towards temporary usage of the banquet hall for conducting the function and the other is for supply of food. Incidentally, they discharged the service tax liability on the ‘hall charges' collected from the customers.
Petitioner blamed for 'killing small businessman and their business' and held liable for ST without notice - Whether order in question has been passed in bonafide exercise of power - notice issued to Addl Commissioner: HC
RANCHI, APRIL 16, 2013: THE petitioner is aggrieved by the liability created against him without notice and the disparaging observations made by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Ranchi in an order-in-original passed recently.
Excise paid on Inputs and ST on Input services used in construction sector can be utilized for discharging ST liability on renting of immovable property - prima facie case in favour - Stay granted: CESTAT
MUMBAI, APRIL 15, 2013: THE appellant are engaged in rendering the taxable service of ‘renting of immovable property' and they discharge service tax liability. They availed CENVAT credit of various services used for construction of the said mall and utilized the credit for payment of service tax on renting of immovable property services.
Payment for licensing of software and for continued support for updates and payments for use of software does not involve any service to consider it as franchisee service - another round of litigation also fails
BANGALORE, APRIL 12, 2013: THE appellants are engaged in marketing and licensing of the popular software known as "my SAP" along with other related software products of software firm based in Germany. They do software licensing, maintenance, consulting and training services. There is an agreement between the appellant and their principals in Germany. Subject to the terms of the agreement, the principals granted to the appellant a non-exclusive license to use, market, sub-license the software, documentation, 3 rd party data base and 3 rd party software to end users in the territory as assigned to the appellants which area is predominantly in India. In consideration of the above licenses and permissions, the appellant was required to make certain payments to the principals in Germany which was mostly from consideration received from the clients to whom the software was marketed. In this proceeding, Revenue is seeking to tax such payments made under provisions of Section 66A of Finance Act, 1994 on the basis that the appellant was receiving franchisee service from their principals in Germany. A demand of Rs.79,07,67,027/- for the period April 2006 to March 2008 was confirmed against the appellants.
Construction of roads on BOT basis - not liable to ST - in spite of clear instructions issued by Board, contrary view has been taken by adjudicating authority for no reasons: CESTAT
MUMBAI, APRIL 11, 2013: THE nine appellants were awarded contracts for the construction of roads by Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation, National Highway Authority of India, Government of Maharashtra and also Government of India. These contracts were on Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT) basis. The consideration for the services rendered under these contracts were allowed to be recovered by collection of toll charges for a fixed tenure and appropriating the same towards the cost incurred. The case of the Revenue is that collection of toll charges by the appellants under these contracts comes within the purview of ‘Business Auxiliary Services'. Notices were issued and demands for service tax along with interest were confirmed apart from imposing equivalent amounts of penalty.
Services relating to Foreign Currency Convertible Bond - Since underwriter service is to be subjected to tax u/s 66A and since in this case it was done outside India, there is no reason seen to tax impugned service: CESTAT
NEW DELHI, APRIL 10, 2013: THE appellant are manufacturers of chemicals and pharmaceuticals products chargeable to central excise duty. During 2004-2005, 2005-2006 and 2006-2007, they issued Foreign Currency Convertible Bond (FCCB) to the extent of USD 35 Million, USD 75 Million and USD 200 Million through ABN AMRO Rothschild and JP Morgan Securities Ltd., USA , who had acted as the lead manager to the issue and to whom payments of Rs.5,23,62,658/-, Rs.7,93,42,445/- and Rs.12,34,37,000/- respectively had been made during those years.
Indian Railways though part of Union Govt is liable to pay Service Tax in case activities undertaken by them fall within definition of taxable services - Pre-deposit ordered: CESTAT
MUMBAI, APRIL 09, 2013: THE appellant, a division of the Indian Railways, are inter alia engaged in the activities of Renting of Immovable Property Service, Sale of place or time for Advertisement Service and Mandap Keeper Service.
Your customer's customer is not your customer - When a service is rendered to third party at behest of your customer, recipient is your customer and not third party - Appellant agreeing to provide telecom services to customer of foreign service provider while he is in India using appellant's network - Rebate permissible: CESTAT
MUMBAI, APRIL 08, 2013: WHAT better way to examine and explain the issue involved to the Revenue than by giving the following example. “When a florist delivers a bouquet on your request to your friend for which you make the payment, as far as the florist is concerned, you are the customer and not your friend.”
Commissioner of ST, Mumbai and officers subordinate to him are CE Officers empowered to assess and collect ST within their jurisdiction - s.83A also envisages determination of ST liability and interest thereon: CESTAT
MUMBAI, APR 05, 2013: IN one of the biggest challenges to the very foundation of the superintending authority, the CESTAT, WZB was witness to a total of 41 miscellaneous applications in 40 appeals filed before it and the parties involved were a virtual who's who of the Service Industry. Suffice to say that bankers, financial advisories, Life Insurance Companies, Telecom companies, Property Developers, the Cricket Board and an acting school were the applicants and the CESTAT took all the applications together as a common issue had been raised in all these applications.
Any order directing party to pay any amount as pre-deposit should be in writing and has to be tendered as per provisions of s.37C of CEA, 1944 - matter remanded to Commissioner(A): CESTAT
MUMBAI, APR 04, 2013:The appellant undertook laying of cables, installation of electrical equipments, installation of street lights and transformers etc. The department was of the view that the activity undertaken by the appellant falls under the category of "Erection, Commissioning and Installation Services".
Onsite services rendered abroad - CENVAT credit refund ineligible prior to 27/02/2010 as same does not constitute exports as defined in Rule 3(2) of Export Rules, 2005 - appellant's subsidiaries located outside India are independent entities and they are not their agents: CESTAT
MUMBAI, APR 03, 2013: M/S Tech Mahindra Ltd. is engaged interalia in the business of “Information Technology Software Services” as defined in Section 65 (105) (zzzze) of the Finance Act, 1994 and they are providing these services mainly to their overseas customers.