Goods & Services Tax
Service Tax Case Laws

Search ST Case Laws

Keyword

Authority

Court

Section

Appeal No.

Date of Order

Date of Order

Judge

Favouring

Login/Subscribe to get access. Plan starts from Rs. 3500/-  Subscribe Now

Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-01-21

We find that the appellant had filed SLP before the Supreme Court on the 90 day after receipt of the impugned order. Thus, we find that the appellant was not diligent in pursuing the appeal remedy. However, in the interest of justice, we condone the delay subject to payment of Rs, 5000/- payable in Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Relief Fund.


Court: CESTAT Bangalore Date of Order: 2019-01-17

The appellants, Adecco Flexi One Work Force Solution  Ltd. (presently known as Adecco India Pvt. Ltd.) are engaged in  supply of manpower services and they have been issued SCNs for  non-payment/delayed payment of Service Tax for the period  10/2002 to 2/2009. In some cases, appeals have reached this  Bench and Final Orders have been passed. The present set of four  appeals ST/399/2008, ST/455/2008, ST/466/2008 & ST/467/2008  are for consideration.


Court: CESTAT Hyderabad Date of Order: 2019-01-17

After hearing both sides, we find that the issue is not covered by any precedent decisions and the bench is hearing matters of 2009-2011 for disposal on priority basis. Hence, the application for early hearing is rejected with liberty to file the same as and when if advised to do so.


Court: CESTAT Hyderabad Date of Order: 2019-01-17

After hearing both sides, we find that the issue may be covered by various decisions of this bench. Accordingly, we allow the application for out of turn hearing of the appeal and direct the registry to list the appeal for disposal on 27.02.2019.


Court: CESTAT Hyderabad Date of Order: 2019-01-17

After hearing both sides, we find that the issue is not covered by any precedent decisions and the bench is now hearing matters of 2009-2011 for disposal on priority basis. Hence, the application for early hearing is rejected with liberty to file the same as and when advised to do so.


Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-01-17

The application filed for condoning the delay of 1225 days  is absolutely vague. It does not indicate the date when the recovery  team visited the office of the appellant nor does it purport to give an  appropriate reply to the information supplied to the appellant under  the Right To Information Act. The appellant appeared before the  Appellate Authority and there is no reason as to why the appellant  should not have made efforts at the earliest to find if any order had  been passed or not. This apart, copy of the letter dated 9 February,  2017 sent by the appellant to Assistant Commissioner, Recovery,  Customs Preventive indicates that they had received a letter dated 5  January, 2016 sent by Assistant Commissioner for deposit of Rupees  Five lakh as penalty. There is no explanation as to why the appellant  did not immediately make efforts to obtain a copy of the appellate order in case they had actually not received the same but they waited  for a long period up to 20 September, 2017 to file an application under  the Right to Information Act. The same averment has been made in  the communications dated 16 March,2016 and 9 June, 2016, copies  of which are at pages 99 and 101 of the appeal memorandum. This  shows that the appellant was aware of the order on 5 January, 2016  at least on 16 March, 2016.


Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-01-17

Matter is adjourned to 21.02.2019, as a last chance, on the request of Advocate as the arguing counsel is not available today.


Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-01-17

Due to paucity of time, not reached. Adjourned to 13.03.2019.


Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-01-17

Adjourned to 21.02.2019 on the request of ld. Advocate for the appellant.


Court: CESTAT New Delhi Date of Order: 2019-01-17

None appeared for the appellant.. Adjourned to 28.02.2019. Issue notice.