Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.24 seconds)
Documents citing Suprasesh General Insurance Services ... vs Commissioner Of Service Tax on 13 December, 2007

Suprasesh General Insurance vs The Assistant Commissioner / on 13 March, 2020

In support of the present writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner drew my attention to the decision of the different High Courts dealing with almost the identical situation relating to aforesaid scheme eligibility on amounts paid prior to passing of the Finance Act, 2013 in Sadguru Construction Co. Vs. Union of India, (2015) 81 VST 95 (Guj) and _____________ Page No 5 of 20 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.11386 of 2014 in Suprasesh General Insurance Services and Brokers (P) Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, (2015) 86 VST 160 (Mad) and in Premier Associates v. Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax, (2018) 49 GSTR 1 (Karn).
Madras High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - C Saravanan - Full Document

M/S Bharat Re-Insurance Brokers Pvt. ... vs Commissioner Of Central Excise And ... on 26 August, 2014

In the appellants own case as well as in the case of Suprasesh G.I.S. & Brokers P. Ltd. (supra), this Tribunal in similar circumstances has taken a view that the appellant does not have a prima facie case. Since in the appellants own case, this Tribunal had required that the appellant should pre-deposit approximately 50% of the tax demanded, we consider that if the appellant deposits a sum of Rs. 9 lakhs (Rupees Nine lakhs only) as pre-deposit within 8 weeks from today and reports compliance to the Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) may treat it as sufficient for hearing and proceed to hearing the appeal on merits. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) with a direction to note the compliance and decide the matter on merits. Needless to say that the appellant shall be given reasonable opportunity to present their case. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1