Commissioner Of Central Excise, Raigad vs Mtnl on 27 September, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI ... Departmental : Yes
authorities?
======================================================
Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad Appellant
Vs.
MTNL Respondent
Appearance:
Shri Ashutosh Nath, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for appellant
None for respondent
CORAM
goods manufactured by the assessee are
supplied mainly to DOT, MTNL & AIR.
2.2 On the basis of intelligence gathered by the departmental
officers, that ... rent to the Appellants. Further, the
Appellants sold the goods to MTNL and received the
consideration and the said consideration was paid
goods manufactured by the assessee are
supplied mainly to DOT, MTNL & AIR.
2.2 On the basis of intelligence gathered by the departmental
officers, that ... rent to the Appellants. Further, the
Appellants sold the goods to MTNL and received the
consideration and the said consideration was paid
goods manufactured by the assessee are
supplied mainly to DOT, MTNL & AIR.
2.2 On the basis of intelligence gathered by the departmental
officers, that ... rent to the Appellants. Further, the
Appellants sold the goods to MTNL and received the
consideration and the said consideration was paid
paying Service Tax on Leased Circuit Services
provided by them to MTNL. The contention of the appellant for
not paying service tax in respect ... services provided by
them to MTNL to effect that the services provided by them to
MTNL were not exclusive use of MTNL, and MTNL being
India and
others 17. The Delhi High Court observed that merely because MTNL had
not declared the receipt of compensation as payment for taxable service ... material fact. The
Delhi High Court further observed that the contention of MTNL that receipt
was not taxable under the Act is a substantial
India and
others 22. The Delhi High Court observed that merely because MTNL had not
declared the receipt of compensation as payment for taxable service ... material fact. The Delhi High
Court further observed that the contention of MTNL that receipt was not
taxable under the Act is a substantial
India and
others 16. The Delhi High Court observed that merely because MTNL had
not declared the receipt of compensation as payment for taxable service ... material fact. The
Delhi High Court further observed that the contention of MTNL that receipt
was not taxable under the Act is a substantial
India and
others14. The Delhi High Court observed that merely because MTNL had
not declared the receipt of compensation as payment for taxable service,
does ... material fact. The
Delhi High Court further observed that the contention of MTNL that receipt
was not taxable under the Act is a substantial
Ericsson India Private Limited vs Additional Director General ... on 14 October, 2025
CUSTOMS, EXCISE &
