Jurisprudentiol - Wednesday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

CE-Settlement Commission - Penalty - once allegations in show cause notices are admitted by petitioner, it is not open to petitioner to contend that Settlement Commission ought to have passed detailed reasoned order before imposing penalty: HC

This petition challenges the order of the Settlement Commission, Customs and Central Excise (Settlement Commission) to the extent it imposes a penalty of Rs.15 lacs on the petitioner.

Consequent to a search, show cause notice dated 30/11/2005 demanding in the aggregate a duty of Rs.3.30 crores was issued to the petitioner. The notice alleged that during the period April, 2001 to September, 2002 the petitioner had cleared partially oriented yarn (POY) of higher grade by downgrading the variety of POY in its invoices and thus discharging duty on a lower value. Therefore evasion of duty is alleged.

Income Tax

Income Tax - Whether a Diagnostic Centre is an industrial undertaking within meaning of Section 80-IA - NO: HC

THE issue before the Bench is - Whether a Diagnostic Centre is an industrial undertaking within the meaning of Section 80-IA. And the verdict goes in favour of the Revenue.

Service Tax

ST - Since imposition of penalty u/s 77 & 78 was only issue before Commissioner(A), there is no bar in initiating revision proceedings in matter of imposition of penalty u/s 76 of FA, 1994 - Penalty imposed by revisionary authority u/s 76 upheld, however benefit of cum-tax benefits extended - Appeal disposed of: CESTAT

THE appellant was issued a SCN dated 14/02/2008 by the Assistant Director, DGCEI, Nashik, inter alia demanding service tax amounting to Rs. 4,64,524/- in respect of "Franchisee service" and "Business Auxiliary service" provided by them from 26/07/2006 to 15/03/2007.

See our Columns Tomorrow for the judgements