NOTIFICATIONS

stnot17_001

Mega Exemption Notification No. 25/2012-ST amended so as to (i) withdraw w.e.f 22.01.2017 the exemption from service tax for services provided or agreed to be provided by a person located in non-taxable territory to a person located in non-taxable territory by way of transportation of goods by a vessel from a place outside India up to the customs station of clearance in India; (ii) exempt services provided by a business facilitator or a business correspondent to a banking company with respect to accounts in its rural area branch

stnot17_002

STR, 1994 amended w.e.f 22.01.2017 so as to, (i) exclude such persons from the definition of aggregator who enable a potential customer to connect with persons providing services by way of renting of hotels, inns, guest houses, clubs, campsites or other commercial places meant for residential or lodging purposes subject to fulfillment of certain conditions; (ii) Specify the person complying with the sections 29, 30 or 38 read with section 148 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962) as the person liable for paying service tax in case of services provided or agreed to be provided by a person located in non-taxable territory to a person located in non-taxable territory by way of transportation of goods by a vessel from a place outside India up to the customs station of clearance in India.

stnot17_003

Service Tax payable on reverse charge - Notfn. 30/2012-ST amended w.e.f 22.01.2017 so as to specify the person complying with the sections 29, 30 or 38 r/s section 148 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962) as the person liable for paying service tax in case of services provided or agreed to be provided by a person located in non-taxable territory to a person located in non-taxable territory by way of transportation of goods by a vessel from a place outside India up to the customs station of clearance in India.

stnot17_004

Abatement for tour operator services rationalised effective from 22.01.2017 - notfn. No. 26/2012-ST amended.

cnt03_2017

All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback - Notification 131/2016-Cus(NT) amended w.e.f 15.01.2017

CASE LAWS

2017-TIOL-85-HC-KERALA-ST

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT Vs UoI: KERALA HIGH COURT (Dated: November 18, 2016)

Service Tax - Applicability to States - Writ Appeal - The challenge in W.P.(C)No. 10423/2015 was as to the proceedings of the competent authority by way of assessment to service tax in terms of the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994; wherein the plea of the Petitioner that the State was founded on the sovereign authority of the State and its activities through State Government as part of sovereign functions - The petition failed and is agitated in appeal herein.

Held: State of Kerala has attempted to raise further grounds which are essentially challenging the applicability of the Finance Act, 1994, and, in particular, some of the provisions thereof, to the activities of the State in relation to the agricultural urban wholesale markets - the ends of justice requires that all such issues raised by the State be preserved for being raised in appropriate proceedings, because no such ground was raised in the writ petition - All issues relating to the constitutionality of the provisions as may be found available to the appellant would stand left open and the impugned judgment is affirmed in so far as it relegates the State to the appropriate statutory appellate authority in terms of the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 on all issues of facts and law - The interlocutory order granted in this appeal will continue for a period of four weeks to enable the appellant to submit its appeal before the appropriate statutory authority - since the matter was gaining attention before the single Judge and the Division Bench, with interlocutory orders in favour of the State Government, the Appellate Authority under the Finance Act will consider the issue relating to the period of filing of the appeal sympathetically and treat it as having been instituted within the period prescribed. [Para 3, 4]

Appeal disposed of

2017-TIOL-86-HC-MAD-CX

IP RINGS LTD Vs CESTAT: MADRAS HIGH COURT (Dated: December 8, 2016)

Central Excise - CENVAT Credit - The assessee has been denied the credit of service tax paid on catering services on the ground that the same is not used in or in relation to the manufacture of the finished excisable goods in its factory.

Held: Issue stands decided in favour of the assessee by the decisions of this Court in (a) The Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. Borg Warner Morse Tec Murugappa Pvt Ltd and (b) The Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. Visteon Powertrain Control Systems (P) Ltd. - Accordingly, the questions of law are answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue - It is clarified that the cost of food borne by the worker should not be taken into consideration for the purpose of grant of credit of service tax [Para 4, 5]

Appeal allowed

2017-TIOL-87-HC-AHM-CUS

ADANI ENTERPRISES LTD Vs UoI: GUJARAT HIGH COURT (Dated: November 23, 2016)

Customs - Adjudication - SCN dated 11.09.2009 issued by DRI, pending adjudication is sought to be expedited in this SCA.

Held: In terms of Sl.No.24 of Notification No.82/2016-Cus. (NT) dated 7th June, 2016, read with circular No.18/2015-customs dated 09.06.2015, the Principal Commissioner of Customs, Customs House, Ahmedabad has been appointed as the common adjudicating authority, who is expected to proceed further pursuant to the show cause notice dated 11.09.2009 in accordance with law and take a final decision and pass an order on the show cause notice after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and not later than 30th June, 2017. [Para 6]

Petition disposed of

2017-TIOL-118-CESTAT-DEL + STORY

JAI INTERNATIONAL Vs CC: DELHI CESTAT (Dated: January 6, 2017)

Customs - Import of motorcycle parts which were later found to be counterfeit - wrong despatch of goods - Allowed to be re-exported.: The appellant filed a Bill of Entry and declared the import goods as unbranded motorcycle parts. However, the goods were 100% examined by the Customs authorities. During such examination, the goods were found to bear a brand name. On investigation, it was found that the imported goods "Roll On" brand motorcycle chain were counterfeit. Consequently, mis-declaration of the imported goods stands established and the goods are liable for confiscation under Section 111(m) and 111(l) of the Customs Act, 1962. In this regard, the findings by both the authorities below merit no interference.

In the present case, however, the wrong supply has been made of goods baring counterfeit brand name. This involves not only mis-declaration of imported goods, but also infringement of Intellectual Property Rights. Since the exporter is willing to take back the wrongly supplied goods, the same should permitted. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, a penalty of Rs 1 lakh imposed on the importer under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 .

Paras 5, 6, 7

Appeal partly allowed in favour of assessee