Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.28 seconds)Section 76 in Finance Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 65 in Finance Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 66 in Finance Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 69 in Finance Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 68 in Finance Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
M/S. Ravi Foods Pvt. Ltd vs Cce, Hyderabad on 22 December, 2010
Service Tax Appeal No. 50708 Of 2019
Service Tax Appeal No. 50709 Of 2019
Prachi Leathers Pvt. Ltd. vs CCE 2
Globe India Ltd. vs CCE3
Frisco Foods Pvt. Ltd. vs CCE4
She submitted that otherwise also this was revenue neutral situation
as the appellant was entitled for cenvat credit of the service tax paid
on the commission paid to the agent.
Commnr. Of Customs (Import), Mumbai vs M/S. Dilip Kumar And Company on 30 July, 2018
11. Further, we find that the Constitution Bench of the Supreme
Court in its judgment dated 30.07.2018 in the case of Commissioner
of Customs vs Dilip Kumar and Company7 held that every taxing
statue including, charging, computation and exemption clause should
be interpreted strictly. Further, in case of ambiguity in an exemption
provision, benefit must go to the Revenue. Thus, the „burden of proof‟
is upon the taxpayer claiming the benefit of exemption or exception
clause to prove the applicability of such exemption. The relevant paras
are reproduced hereinafter for ease of reference: -
Section 76 in The Finance Act, 2018 [Entire Act]
Pratibha Processors & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 11 October, 1996
15. As regards interest, we note that Supreme Court in the case of
Pratibha Processors & Ors vs Union of India & Ors8 has held that
8 [AIR 1997 SUPREME COURT 138]
16
Service Tax Appeal No. 50708 Of 2019
Service Tax Appeal No. 50709 Of 2019
"Interest is compensatory in character and is imposed on an assessee
who has withheld payment of any tax as and when it is due and
payable." Accordingly, the demand for interest is also upheld.