Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Service Tax

Appellant receiving commission from client without any service tax - being a honest tax payer he got himself registered and paid ST on commission received - refund claim filed on ground that exemption is available for sum of Rs 8 lakhs - denial of refund on ground that option under clause 2(i) of notfn not exercised is improper - exemption admissible: CESTAT

IN this case the appellant had done only one transaction of receiving commission of Rs.20 lakhs on 12.8.2007 and it is also a fact that no service tax has been received by the appellant. Although the appellant has not received the service tax, but being an honest tax payer, he opted to pay service tax on the commission received by him and applied for service tax registration and, therefore, he paid the service tax. So, there is no question to opt to go out of exemption limit as per the said notification. Hence condition 2(i) of the said notification is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case

Income Tax

Income tax - Is assessee entitled to claim deduction for mutual fund scheme expenses incurred in excess of limits prescribed by SEBI? - YES, says ITAT

THE first issue before the Tribunal is - Whether the mutual fund scheme expenses incurred in excess of the limits prescribed by the SEBI Mutual Fund Regulation Act, 1996 are disallowable. And the Tribunal's answer is YES.

Central Excise

Export of used Cenvatted capital goods under bond - Assessee to pay an amount equal to credit taken - no legal requirement of exporter having to disclose in shipping bill as to whether they had paid an amount equal to CENVAT credit availed on capital goods (export goods) or not - good case on ground of limitation - Stay granted: CESTAT

THE assessee exported old/used Cenvatted capital goods under bond in July, 2005. The jurisdictional Central Excise authorities invoked the provisions of rule 3(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and raised a demand of over Rs.1.6 Crores. The CCE, Thane-I confirmed the demand and imposed an equivalent amount of penalty. The matter is before the CESTAT with an application seeking waiver of pre-deposit and stay of the adjudged dues.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements