Jurisprudentiol - Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Stay and Waiver of pre-deposit: EPC need not be the whole project, it can also be a part - Person includes Government - Pre-deposit ordered: CESTAT

THIS is a Stay and waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax of Rs.3,87,51,973/- for "Commercial or Industrial Construction Service", for the period December 2005 to September 2009 and service tax of Rs.28,94,07,221/- under the taxable "Works Contract Service", for the period June 2007 to September 2009.

The petitioner during the period in question entered into several contracts, 12 in number; 11 pertaining to provision of the taxable 'works contract service' entered into with the Irrigation and CAD Department of the State of Andhra Pradesh and one contract for the taxable "industrial or commercial construction" service pursuant to a contract with the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Ltd. (APGENCO).

It is noted that the impugned order to the extent it confirms the service tax demand in relation to the taxable "works contract service", is covered in favour of Revenue by the judgment of this Tribunal in Ramky Infrastructure Ltd. vs. C.S.T., Hyderabad - 2012-TIOL-613-CESTAT-BANG.

Income Tax

Whether doctrine of 'source of source' and 'origin of origin' can be applied universally - NO, not without reference to factual matrix: Delhi High Court

THE issues before the Bench are - Whether it is the duty of Revenue to adduce evidence to show from what source, income is derived; Whether submission of PAN is a sufficient compliance of proving genuineness of an assessee; Whether the doctrine of "source of source" and "origin of origin" can be applied universally and Whether creditworthiness of an assessee can be proved by mere issue of a cheque or by furnishing a copy of statement of bank account. And the verdict goes in favour of Revenue.

Central Excise

Manufacture - cutting of carpet rolls into smaller sizes and subjecting such cut sizes to a process of stitching linings at the edges would not amount to manufacture: CESTAT LB

ON application of the generic principles regarding identification of what processes amount to manufacture within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, illustrated by decisions of the Supreme Court and of the Larger Bench of this Tribunal, held that the cutting of carpet rolls into smaller sizes and subjecting such cut sizes to a process of stitching linings at the edges would not amount to manufacture nor result in emergence of a distinct independent commodity, exigible to duty under provisions of Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

See our Columns Tomorrow for the judgements