Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.47 seconds)Section 76 in Finance Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
M/S Bajaj Travels Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Service Tax on 3 August, 2011
(c) Bajaj Travels Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service tAx [2012 (25) STR 417 (Del.).
State Of Tamil Nadu vs Sri Swamy And Company on 26 February, 1976
(d) State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Sri. Swamy and Company [1977 39 STC 85 Mad]
Commnr. Of Central Excise, New Delhi vs M/S. Hari Chand Shri Gopal & Ors on 18 November, 2010
Ahmd)] which was followed by Honble apex court judgment in case of CCE, New Delhi Vs. Hari Chand Shri. Gopal[2010(260) E.L.T. 3(S.C.)].
Section 77 in Finance Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
M/S. Rishad Shipping & Clearing Agency ... vs Commissioner Of Customs, Mumbai on 19 October, 2010
I am of the view that the case of Rishi Shipping(supra) is related to the adjustment of excess amount in terms of Rule 6 (4A) where limit is only Rs. 1 lakh whereas in the present case appellant claimed that adjustment is in terms of Rule 6(1A) therefore the said judgment is not applicable. As per my above discussion, I am of the considered view that as per the facts, appellants case is covered by Rule 6(1A) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 according to which the adjustment of advance payment is permissible against service tax liability in the subsequent period without any limit of the amount, therefore the impugned order is not sustainable, hence the same is set aside. Appeal is allowed.
Commissioner Of Central Excise vs Src Projects Ltd on 24 June, 2010
(a) Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem Vs. SRC Projects Ltd. [2010(20) S.T.R 687 (Tri. Chennai)].
1