Jurisprudentiol – Monday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Tax payable on services received from abroad - Tax can be paid from CENVAT Credit: HC

IN the instant case, though he is the recipient of service tax, the service provider is outside the country. In law, he is treated as a service provider and is levied tax. In other words, the liability to pay tax on the service, which he has received, is foisted on him under law. It is to discharge the liability he is entitled to use the Cenvat credit, which was available with him, and therefore the Tribunal was justified in interfering with the order passed by the Commissioner. As there is no liability to pay tax, the question of imposing penalty would not arise.

Income Tax

Whether when a charitable Trust makes donation to another Trust having Sec 80G Certificate, such donation can also be treated as charitable object - YES, rules ITAT

ASSESSEE, a Public Charitable Trust, is constituted by a Deed of Trust dated 19.4.1984 with Supplementary Deeds dated 6.5.2000 and 19.1.2001. It is registered u/s 12A of the Act and its income is exempt u/s 11 of the Act. However, the Assessing Officer has held that the Trust is not eligible for exemption u/s 11 because it has given certain donations in contravention of the objects of the Trust- CIT(A) relying on the observations made in remand report allowed the appeal of the assessee- Matter reached to the ITAT.

Central Excise

Cenvat Credit availed on allegedly non-existent grey fabrics stock - Central Government Examiner of Questioned Documents has in his report concluded that signatures on application for registration and declarations of stocks were not made by applicants - Recovery stayed: CESTAT

IT can be seen that the adjudicating authority has clearly recorded that the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents, Hyderabad has reported, that signatures made on the application for Central Excise Registration Certificate, and the declaration, do not tally/match. This would definitely indicate that the applications for registration and declarations of stocks were not made by the appellant/applicants either in their capacity as director of the companies or in their personal capacity.

See our columns Monday for the judgements