News Update

FM reviews CAPEX of CPSEsGovt writes to over 2800 corporates to clear MSME duesGovt carrying out reforms in every sector of economy to prop up growth: PMIgnoring limitation proves costlyInverted duty structure - A Case study (See 'TOG Insight' in Taxongo.com)CBIC promotes four officers as Pr Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise + posts Sameer Pandey as DS in GST Council SecretariatSC cannot be a place for Govts to walk in when they choose, ignoring period of limitation prescribed - Petition dismissed as time barred; costs imposed on State for wasting judicial time - amount to be recovered from officers responsible: SCIs penalty compulsorily attracted on late payment of GST?No mutation of COVID-19 detected in India: Health MinisterCus - Goods re-imported for repair and re-exported - Merely because Assessee could claim duty drawback later on and it may give rise to a revenue neutral situation, it cannot be said that period of one year prescribed in 158/95-Cus is without any meaning: HCST - Payment of mobilization advance is a separate financial transaction within contract for providing of service & so is not to be included in gross taxable value as per Section 67 of Finance Act 1994 - duty demand cannot be raised thereon when there is no allegation of any part of contracted value having evaded taxation: CESTATBSVI introduction a revolutionary step: JavadekarCX - It is settled position in law that an assessee is entitled to interest on delayed disbursal of refund after three months from date of filing of refund claim till date of its realisation: CESTATCus - Drawback - After turning down request for taking test samples, Revenue cannot brush aside report given by an expert Committee simply for the reason that sample was not drawn and referred by Department: CESTATPayment made to a trust formed for the benefit of employees of the company, of which the assessee was a shareholder & whose shares the assessee had sold, does not qualify as expenditure incurred wholly in connection with transfer of asset: HCBogus purchases - only the profit element embedded therein is to be disallowed, rather than the entire quantum of purchases made: ITATSearch assessment is invalid where it is completed even before search operations are conducted or where any material incriminating the assessee has not yet been found: ITATWhere assessee did not claim exemption in respect of one residential property, the assessee can avail such benefit in respect of a second house or plot of land: ITATIndia successfully test-fires cruise missile from Indian Navy’s destroyer INS ChennaiCOVID-19: Global tally goes past FOUR Crore with 11.15 lakh deaths; America has close to 27 lakh active cases against 8 lakh in IndiaCOVID-19 - Almost 80% new cases coming from 10 StatesCountrywide S&T infrastructure facilities to be accessible to industry & startups: GovtPM calls for speedy access to vaccines once readyNew Zealand PM earns second term for managing COVID-19 wellDigital Media - Govt to extend all benefits available to othersGovt not considering any DA for Govt employees: GangwarCBDT issues transfer order of 395 Addl / JCITs on All India basisSBI given nod for sale of electoral bonds for 10 daysEducation CESS - the spoilt fruit
 
No More Cess from July 1, 2012?

JUNE 26, 2012

By K Vaitheeswaran, Advocate

A careful reading of the various provisions/notifications ushering in the new negative list based concept of service tax indicates that there are many pitfalls which are likely to cause difficulties for the Government.

Section 91 of the Finance Act (No.2) Act, 2004 levied education cess at the rate of 2% and Section 95 reads as under:

"The Education Cess levied under Section 91 in the case of all services which are taxable services shall be a tax (in this Section referred to as The Education Cess on taxable service) at the rate of 2% calculated on the tax which is levied under Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994)."

A plain reading of Finance Act, 2004 indicates that education cess of 2% was levied on the service tax payable under Section 66.

Section 136 of the Finance Act, 2007 imposed Secondary and Higher Education Cess and as per Section 140, the cess was at the rate of 1% calculated on the tax which is levied and collected under Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994).

The Central Government vide Notification No.22/2012 dated 05.06.2012 appointed 01.07.2012 as the date from which the provision of Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 ceases to apply except as respects thinks done or omitted to be done before the said Section 66 so ceases to apply. Section 66 ceases to exist from 01.07.2012 and Section 66B which is the new charging section for the levy of service tax is effective from 01.07.2012.

Section 66B reads as under:

There shall be levied a tax (hereinafter referred to as the service tax) at the rate of 12% on the value of all services other than those services specified in the negative list, provided or agreed to be provided in the taxable territory by one person to another and collected in such manner as may be prescribed.

Finance Act, 2012 has not made any amendment to Section 95 of the Finance Act, 2004 and Section 140 of the Finance Act, 2007 so as to enable the levy of Education Cess and Secondary and Higher Education Cess payable on service tax levied under Section 66B of the Finance Act, 2012.

Therefore when service tax as a tax is levied only under Section 66B, it may not be possible to levy education cess at 2% and secondary education cess at 1% which is a cess on a tax referred to in Section 66. With due respect, the Removal of Difficulty Order cannot be a solution since the cess is levied under Finance Act, 2004 and Finance Act, 2007 and has no connection to Section 66B introduced by Finance Act, 2012.


POST YOUR COMMENTS