Page 219 - GSTL_26th March 2020_Vol 34_Part 4

2020 ] SUBJECT INDEX 713
Delay in filing appeal when condonable/not condonable - See under
APPEAL ..................................... 422, 577
— in filing second appeal against dismissal of appeal for non-compliance of
pre-deposit order, restoration on cost - See under APPEAL TO
APPELLATE AUTHORITY ............................ 577
— Limitation for appeal - Delay when condonable not condonable - See
under APPEAL .................................... 48
Deliberate default not established, demand for extended period and penalty
not sustainable - See under DEMAND AND PENALTY ............ 224
DEMAND :
— and penalty - Limitation - No audit objection raised for non-payment of
Service Tax on penalty deducted in terms of contract between parties -
HELD : Invocation of extended period of limitation was bad - Also,
penalty was not imposable as there was no suppression of facts or
deliberate default - Sections 76 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994 — Khaira and
Associates v. Commr. of Cus., C. Ex. & S.T., Bhopal (Tri. - Del.) ............... 224
— Business Exhibition Service - Service Tax raised on amount received by
appellant for setting up of media centers for broadcasting and telecasting
of sports events, news of Commonwealth Games, 2010 are not
sustainable as they were not rendering any taxable services and also not
liable to Service Tax even on reverse charge basis - Demand along with
interest and penalty set aside - Sections 75 and 76 of Finance Act, 1994 —
India Trade Promotion Organisation v. Commr. of S.T., Delhi-IV (Tri. - Del.) .......... 544
— Common inputs/input services used in manufacture of dutiable as well
as exempted goods, demand of 10% not sustainable on supply to SEZ
developer - See under CENVAT CREDIT .................... 425
— confirmed in respect of GST paid goods under provision which is in
respect of non-tax paid goods not sustainable - See under
DETENTION/SEIZURE .............................. 151
— Distance error in E-way Bill being a procedural error, minor penalty
imposable but demand of tax set aside - See under DETENTION ....... 272
— E-way Bill not updated on break down of vehicle, minor penalty
imposable but demand of tax set aside - See under DETENTION ....... 251
— Expiry of time mentioned in E-way Bill, minor penalty imposable but
demand of tax set aside - See under DETENTION ................ 261
— Goods Transport Agency services - Since appellant has not disputed
demand of Service Tax on this count, same is confirmed - Section 73 of
Finance Act, 1994 — Swift Institute of Engineering & Technology v. Commr. of C. Ex. &
S.T., Chandigarh-II (Tri. - Chan.) ............................. 502
— Intention to evade tax not established, demand of tax not sustainable - See
under DETENTION ................................ 283
— Limitation - Cenvat credit on outward transportation charges availed post
1-4-2008 in view of C.B.E. & C. Circular No. 97/8/2007-S.T., dated 23-8-
2007 though credit on such charges subsequently held to be not
admissible by Supreme Court - No mala fide can be attributed to assessee
for availment of such credit - Extended period of limitation not invocable
- Section 73 of Finance Act, 1994 — Ved PMC Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central
Excise, Belapur (Tri. - Mumbai) .............................. 442
— Limitation - Extended period of limitation not invocable when evidence
on record didn’t reflect any mala fide intention of the assessee - Demand
GST LAW TIMES  26th March 2020  315