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

2014 (12) TMI 826

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd claim - Unjust enrichment - Bonafide belief that assessee not bound to pay service tax - Passing of incidence duty to consumers - Held that:- Appellate Commissioner concluded that analysis of the invoices issued by the appellant clearly disclosed that no Service Tax component was included in and collected from the customers by the assessees; that the assessees had remitted Service Tax by treati .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... respondent/assessee. 2. Revenue preferred these appeals against the common order dated 31-10-2008 passed by the learned Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur-II allowing two appeals preferred by the respondents/assessees. In substance, the order of the appellate Authority results in sanction of refund of ₹ 67,646/- and ₹ 90,580/- in favour of the respective respondent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y the claim for refund should not be credited to the consumer welfare fund on grounds of unjust enrichment. In response, assessees submitted that they were not aware that they were providing the taxable tour operator service; that they had not collected any Service Tax from customers; that on being intimated by the concerned Superintendent that they were providing a taxable service they obtained r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (80) R.L.T. 35 (CESTAT) = 2007 (219) E.L.T. 526 (Tribunal) = 2009 (15) S.T.R. 501 (Tribunal); in ITC Bhadrachalam Paper Boards Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2002 (146) E.L.T. 582 (Trib.) and in Collector v. Metro Tyres Ltd. reported in 1996 (82) E.L.T. 95 (Trib.) which was upheld by the Supreme Court vide 1997 (94) E.L.T. A51 (S.C.), was distinguished by the adjudicating authority, on the ground that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Ltd. v. CCE, Nagpur reported in 2008 (85) R.L.T. 845 CESTAT = 2008 (226) E.L.T. 428 (Tribunal) and in M/s. Amadalavalasa Cooperative Sugars Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2007 (80) R.L.T. 35 (CESTAT) = 2007 (219) E.L.T. 526 (Tribunal) = 2009 (15) S.T.R. 501 (Tribunal), to conclude that were the contract price is inclusive of duty, there cannot be unjust enrichment. 7. In our considered view, there .....

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