Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.24 seconds)

M/S. Uco Bank, Kolkata vs Commissioner Of Service Tax, Kolkata on 25 September, 2014

In view of the above, we come to the conclusion that the services rendered by the Appellants in advancing loans etc. are exempt. Therefore, the amount of interest earned in advancing of loans needs to be taken into consideration while determining the amount to be reversed in term of Rule 6(3A)(c) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the commissioner. We find that such a view is in conformity with decision of the Kolkata Bench of Tribunal in case of UCO Bank Vs Commissioner of Service Tax Kolkata (Supra) and these bench in the case of HDFC (Supra).
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 13 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Union Of India vs M/S Intercontinental Consultants And ... on 7 March, 2018

3.5. Service Tax of directors sitting fees: The Appellants submits that sitting fees paid to directors was brought under Service Tax vide RCF by virtue notification 45/2012 dated 07.08.2012.The learned commissioner confirmed the demand not only on the sitting fees of the directors but also on the reimbursed expenses observing that the CA certificate did not certify the actual sitting fees and reimbursement. Reimbursement expenses are not to be included in view of Supreme Court decision in the case of UOI Vs Intercontinental consultant and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd (2018-19) Taxman.com 67 SC. No demand on 6 Appeal No. ST/85914 /2016 & ST/86028/16 sitting fees can be confirmed prior to 01.08.2012 as the notification was issued in 07.08.2012. The Appellants have discharge the liability from 01.07.2012.
Supreme Court of India Cites 28 - Cited by 91 - A K Sikri - Full Document

Commissioner Of Central Excise Pune-I vs M/S. Krohne Marshall Pvt. Ltd. on 15 July, 2016

6.6 Coming to the levy of Service Tax on the Directors' sitting fees we find that the Appellants has submitted that the demand was confirmed not only on the sitting fees but also on the expenses reimbursed. The 14 Appeal No. ST/85914 /2016 & ST/86028/16 Learned Commissioner has not considered this request only on the issue that the CA Certificate did not certify actual sitting fees and expenses reimbursed. We find force in the Appellants argument that reimbursed expenses are not to be included in the value of the taxable services in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Intercontinental Consultants& Technocrat Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). Therefore, we find that this issue also needs to go back to the adjudicating authority for a proper appreciation of the facts of the case and to give allowance in respect of reimbursed expenses to the Appellants.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 5 - Full Document
1