REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Carrier Point Appellant

V/S

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

TWENTY FIRST CENTURY STEEL (P) LTD. [REFERRED TO]
M/S. VIGYAN GURUKUL V. C.C.E.,JAIPUR [REFERRED TO]
SUCHIATRA COMPONENTS LTD. V. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA VS. THEIR WORKMEN [REFERRED TO]
KESHAVLAL JETHALAL SHAH VS. MOHANLAL BHAGWANDAS [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KERALA VS. B C SRINIVASA SETTY:SHRI SYED HUSSAIN SAHEB:M N SANKARANARAYANAN NAIR [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE HYDERABAD VS. CHEMPHAR DRUGS AND LINIMENTS HYDERABAD [REFERRED TO]
PADMINI PRODUCTS VS. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE BANGALORE [REFERRED TO]
SYNTHETICS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE SHILLONG VS. WOOD CRAFT PRODUCTS LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE CALCUTTA VS. PRADYUMNA STEEL LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BOMBAY VS. PODAR CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED AND OT HERS [REFERRED TO]
SOMAIYA ORGANICS INDIA LIMITED VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
W P I L LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE [REFERRED TO]
COMMNR OF CENTRAL EXCISE VS. MYSORE ELECTRICALS INDUSTRIES LTD [REFERRED TO]
BINANI INDUSTRIES LTD VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MARTIN LOTTERY AGENCIES LTD [REFERRED TO]
PAWAN KUMAR VS. DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE [REFERRED TO]
PARO FOOD PRODUCTS VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, HYDERABAD [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of these appeals, the appellants have challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal [2009 (14) S.T.R. 34 (Tribunal)] whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeals of the assessee confirming the order of Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, dated 1-8-2006 whereby the appellants were directed to pay tax for the services rendered after 1-7-2003.

(2.) This Court while admitting the matter has framed the following substantial questions of law :

(3.) The facts of the case are that the assessee is running coaching classes. They have entered into a concluded contract prior to April of every year for collecting fees for the whole year. It goes without saying that for the services which are rendered after 1-7-2003, the fees are received.

Click here to view full judgment.

CARRIER POINT Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address