Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.51 seconds)
Documents citing M/S. Blue Star Limited vs The Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 15 November, 2017

Inventys Research Co Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise-Nagpur on 27 March, 2023

"6. After hearing the Id. DR, I find that there is no definition of export under the Excise Act. As such, going by the definition of export as given in Customs Act or as understood in the common parlance, clearance to 100% EDU cannot be treated as export. The Tribunal in the case of Blue Star Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, reported in 2003 (155) ELT 322 (1) has held that the goods sent to 100% EOU are one step away from completion of export and in itself cannot conclude export. The ratio of the above decision is fully applicable to the facts of the present case. By a fiction of law, goods cleared to 100% EOU have been 6 E/86498/2013 equated with exports, Le, they are deemed export but such fiction of law is created only for a specific purpose and cannot be equated with exports in a blanket manner. Inasmuch as Rule 5 uses expression "export" and not "deemed export", the same has to be limited to the actual export".
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Jalandhar vs Ms Hathway Sukhamrit Cable And Datacom ... on 12 October, 2022

The invoices issued by the MSO on LCO as well as the invoices issued by LCO on subscribers are also placed on record by the respondent. The agreement dated 3.1.2014 between the LCOs & MSO has granted non-exclusive rights to the LCOs to receive signals of its cable services for further re-transmission to the ultimate subscribers. During the period in dispute, the revenue has also raised similar demand on cable operators (LCOs) which was confirmed by the Adjudicating authority therein and when the LCOs approached this Tribunal by way of Appeal, the same was set aside. While allowing one of such appeal filed by one of such cable operator M/s. Blue Star Communication (supra) this Tribunal has held that the cable operators are liable to pay service tax only on the subscriptions received by them from the subscribers for providing the services. We are unable to find from the record anything to suggest that the said order of the Tribunal has been stayed or set aside in Appeal thereafter. Accordingly here also it can be concluded that the respondent i.e. MSO is liable to pay service tax only on their share of revenue. It is not the case of revenue that the respondent is receiving amount in any other form from LCOs rather it is the specific case of revenue that LCOs, after retaining their share of subscription, remitting the balance to the respondent being their share of subscription. Owing to the business model of cable operator industry, the MSO is providing cable operator services 21 ST/60027/2021 to LCO and not to ultimate consumer and hence the MSO would be liable to pay service tax only on the amount received from LCOs whereas LCOs will be separately liable for discharging service tax on gross amount received from the ultimate customers for the service provided by LCO to them. Therefore in view of Section 67 ibid as interpreted by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the cases cited supra as well as the agreements entered into between the LCOs and MSO and also the Board Circulars issued from time to time we have no hesitation in deciding this issue in favour of respondent and against the revenue-appellant by holding that the respondent is liable to pay service tax only on the gross amount received by them from LCOs.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Spencers Travel Services Limited vs Cst Ch on 18 January, 2019

In the case of Blue Star Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore - (2009) 18 STT 34 (Bang.-CESTAT) = 2008 (11) S.T.R. 23 (Tri. - Bang.) the facts were that the appellant therein took orders in India for the goods of foreign principals. Once the foreign supplier exports the goods to India and receives payment, a commission is paid to the appellant. The Tribunal held that the services rendered have been exported in terms of Rule 3(2) of the Export of Services Rules, 2005.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next