R.P.Shrivastava vs The Union Of India on 13 October, 2014
Writ Petition No :: 11115/2005
5
R.P. Shrivastava Vs. Union of India and others.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (1.29 seconds)Documents citing
P.K. Srivastava Son Of Sri Gulab Rai, ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) Through Secretary, ... on 24 January, 2006
Canbank Financial Services Ltd vs Abhay Narottam on 6 September, 2019
Mr. Chatterji sought to
rely upon decision in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd and Ors. vs. Union of India
(UOI) and Ors. [AIR 2006 SC 1383] In my view this decision will have no
bearing on the case and the controversy.
Asia Satellite Telecommunications Co. ... vs Director Of Income Tax on 31 January, 2011
40. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in
the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Union of
India (UOI) and Ors. [282 ITR 273] wherein the Apex Court laid
down the crucial significance of holding the license required to
operate the equipment in question. It is only the person who holds
the requisite license as required by the statute, who can be said to
operate, use and control the equipment in question,. In the
present case, the license required by the statute for operating the
satellite and all its parts, components and systems is held only by
AsiaSat and not by its customers. Further, AsiaSat is prohibited
from parting with control of any part of the operations of the
satellite to its customers.
Commissioner Of Value Added Tax Delhi vs M/S. Carzonrent India Pv. Ltd. on 17 January, 2013
The Court held that no tax can be imposed by way of subsequent lease rent
in respect of the same goods under the Orissa Sales Tax Act; reliance was
also placed on I.T. C. Classic Finance and Services v. Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes, 1995 (1) ALT 563 and Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and
Anr. v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors., AIR 2006 SC 1383.
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 2 March, 2006
Civil Appeals are disposed of in terms of the judgment
delivered by us today in W.P. (C) No. 183/2003 etc. etc.
titled Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of
India & Ors.
Tata Teleservices Limited, Jaipur vs Assessee on 13 March, 2015
(i) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and another vs. Union of
India, 282 ITR (SC).
Appearance vs Shri Arun Kumar, Dy.Commissioner/Ar ... on 1 February, 2018
i) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. Union of India [2006(2)S.T.R 161 (SC)]
Shree Vijayalakshmi Charitable Trust vs -Principal Commissioner Of Gst& ... on 25 April, 2025
I. The impugned transaction is in the nature of sale, liable to VAT
and therefore consideration received from the lessee
representing revenue from the sale of minerals cannot be
subjected to service Tax. Section 65B(44) of the Act defines
services that are exigible to service tax under Section 66B of
the Act and the definition of service expressly excludes a
24
transaction which constitutes nearly a transfer of title in goods
for a consideration. The entire 100% of receipts from mining
of quarried resources has already been subjected to applicable
VAT at the hands of the lessee. The levy of VAT and Service
Tax are mutually exclusive and reliance is placed on the
decisions in Gujarat Ambuja Cements Lad. v. UOL, 2006 (3)
S.TR. 608 (S.C.), Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited vs UOI
reported at 2006 (2) ST.R. 161 (S.C.)
Shree Vijayalakshmi Charitable Trust vs -Principal Commissioner Of Gst& ... on 25 April, 2025
I. The impugned transaction is in the nature of sale, liable to VAT
and therefore consideration received from the lessee
representing revenue from the sale of minerals cannot be
subjected to service Tax. Section 65B(44) of the Act defines
services that are exigible to service tax under Section 66B of
the Act and the definition of service expressly excludes a
24
transaction which constitutes nearly a transfer of title in goods
for a consideration. The entire 100% of receipts from mining
of quarried resources has already been subjected to applicable
VAT at the hands of the lessee. The levy of VAT and Service
Tax are mutually exclusive and reliance is placed on the
decisions in Gujarat Ambuja Cements Lad. v. UOL, 2006 (3)
S.TR. 608 (S.C.), Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited vs UOI
reported at 2006 (2) ST.R. 161 (S.C.)
Narayana Hrudayalaya Limited vs Commercial Taxes Officer & Anr on 10 October, 2017
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no
factual dispute exists in the matter thus even the writ petition is
maintainable. He would not be contesting the writ petition on
(4 of 6)
[ CW-17427/2017]
facts, but, advance arguments purely on question of law, that too,
in reference to Article 366 (29A) of the Constitution of India. It is
to show that in few cases, there cannot be split between service
and sale and the issue is squarely covered by the judgment in the
cases of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Union of
India (UOI) & Ors. reported in AIR 2006 SC 1383, Tata Main
Hospital Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors. reported in 2008
(2) JCR 174, Fortis Health Care Limited and Ors. Vs. State
of Punjab & Ors. reported in 2015(2) TMI 1014 & M/s.
International Hospital Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State off UP & 2 Ors.
reported in 2014(2) ADJ 474. Accordingly, the petitioner
company may not be relegated for the alternative remedy of
appeal as it cannot be taken to be a bar for exercising jurisdiction
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.