Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Central Excise

Simultaneous availment of CENVAT and drawback - Reversal of CENVAT credit does not give cover of availment of duty drawback to appellant: CESTAT

THE appellant had procured duty paid yarn and availed CENVAT credit and subsequently exported the garments under duty drawback scheme claiming full drawback instead of Customs portion of drawback.

Upon realizing their mistake, they reversed CENVAT credit amounting to Rs.98,764/- on account of CENVAT credit availed against raw material used by them in the manufacture of export goods for which duty drawback bills were filed.

Income Tax

Business income vs income from house property - lease rental from commercial property treated as business income for 10 years - In view of principle of consistency and for lack of materials on part of Revenue, it is business income: High Court

THE issue before the High Court is “What would be the nature of rental income received by the assessee on exploitation of commercial property particularly when the same has been assessed as income from business in last 10 years and there is no change in facts.” And the answer is Business income.

Service Tax

Service Tax demand of Rs 6.48 Crores – COD granting clearance to contest only penalty and interest - as liability to service tax demand is not contested, liability to interest confirmed as per law is sustainable - no penalty is liable to be imposed as appellant had rightly believed that activity impugned was not exigible to service tax: CESTAT

AGAINST the oil giant, a demand of Service Tax of Rs.6,47,98,642/- (under the category of GTA Service) was confirmed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai along with interest and various penalties were imposed under Section 76,77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

The oil giant was required to take a clearance from the Committee of Disputes and hence approached the august body. They were granted a clearance but as per the clearance the appellant was allowed to contest only the interest and penalty adjudged in the impugned order .

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements