Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2011 (8) TMI 558

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ess, viability and profit, if not huge profit. The fact that the appellant didn't claim service tax till the 4th instalment persuades us to arrive at a conclusion in favour of the 2nd respondent. Suppression of the prevailing taxes and levies would amount to material misleading concerning the price. Such misleading in turn would come within the above definition of unfair trade practice which we cannot allow, but to deprecate and condemn such greedy devices of the multinational companies in attempt to make pigmy profit exploiting the public including illiterate rural mass. Therefore, we rule that a service provider who doesn't disclose the prevailing statutory duties and levies at the time of transaction is not entitled to claim such taxes .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndent objected the demand of service tax in addition to the premium. The appellant sent Ext.P4 reply stating that in addition to the premium the 2nd respondent is bound to pay 10.3% of the premium as service tax and thus the total amount would come to ₹ 5305.43/-. Being not satisfied with the explanation given by the appellant, the 2nd respondent moved the 1st respondent, Insurance Ombudsman, with a complaint, copy of which is marked as Ext.P5. The appellant filed his written version, copy of which is marked as Ext.P6. 3. The 1st respondent, having heard either side and perusing the materials placed, accepted the case of the 2nd respondent. Consequently, by Ext.P7 award the 1st respondent held that the premium of ₹ 4810/- per .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nable. 7. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties before the 1st respondent as well as before this Court. In the nature of the defence we find that no question of law is involved. The liability to pay the service tax is also not in dispute. The question is whether the premium of ₹ 4810/- is inclusive of tax or not. It depends upon the terms of the contract in pursuance to which Ext.P1 policy was issued. 1st respondent on a finding of facts on the basis of pleadings concluded in Ext.P7 award that the premium amount demanded and accepted by the appellant in 2006, 2007 and 2008 is inclusive of service tax. Evident by the conduct of the appellant, service tax during those three years was paid out of the collected am .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the learned Single Judge was absolutely right in holding that the conclusion of the 1st respondent in Ext.P7 award is not at all vitiated. Neither is there any jurisdictional error. On the other hand, finding is in tune with the pleadings. 8. If we take the argument of the learned senior counsel that the premium offered and accepted was excluding the service tax and the appellant had paid service tax for three years out of pocket, we find an element of unfair trade practice, in canvassing the 2nd respondent, as defined under section 2(r)(1)(ix) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 which reads as follows : (r) unfair trade practice means a trade practice which, for the purpose of promoting the sale, use or supply of any goods or for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he real price at which the service is provided along with prevailing statutory taxes and levies. Suppression of the prevailing taxes and levies would amount to material misleading concerning the price. Such misleading in turn would come within the above definition of unfair trade practice which we cannot allow, but to deprecate and condemn such greedy devices of the multinational companies in attempt to make pigmy profit exploiting the public including illiterate rural mass. Therefore, we rule that a service provider who doesn't disclose the prevailing statutory duties and levies at the time of transaction is not entitled to claim such taxes and levies from the consumer at a later stage during the course of continuing service. The learn .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates