Case Law Research

CESTAT Mumbai : M/s Shree Vaibhav Laxmi Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad : 17th March, 2017



Appeal No.  ST/86515/13
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. US/956/RGD/2013 dated 31.12.2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-II).

M/s Shree Vaibhav Laxmi Co.


Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad

Shri V.S. Sejpal, Advocate for appellant
Shri S.J. Sahu, AC (AR) for respondent


Date of Hearing: 24.02.2017
Date of Decision: 17.03.2017


Per: Raju

The appellants, M/s Shree Vaibhav Laxmi Co., are engaged in providing Manpower Recruitment and Supply Services. The appellants were collecting and paying Service Tax for most of the service provided by them. However, in respect of certain services they were under the impression that they are entitled to Notification No. 8/2005-ST. In respect of such services, the appellant did not collect and pay the Service Tax to the Revenue. However, as soon as the matter was pointed out to the appellant, they paid the Service Tax along with interest before the issue of show-cause notice. However, the demand was confirmed and penalty was imposed on the appellant. The appellants are not contesting the confirmation of demand, however, they are seeking leniency on invocation of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 for setting aside the penalties imposed on them.

2. Learned Counsel for the appellant argued that they were under bona fide belief that they are entitled to Notification No. 8/2005-Service Tax. However, when it was pointed out that they are not entitled to the said notification, they immediately paid the Service Tax along with interest. He argued that this duty demand was merely Rs.2 lakhs, however, they had during this period paid the Service Tax in excess of Rs.10 to 15 lakhs. He argued that there was no mala fide intention and it was under bona fide belief. In these circumstances, it was argued that the penalty imposed on them may be waived.

3. Learned AR relied on the impugned order.

4. The appellants have contended that they were under the bona fide belief that they are entitled for benefit of Notification No. 8/2005-ST. I find that in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is possible. The noticee have shown their bona fide intention by depositing the duty as soon as they pointed out that they are not entitled to such exemption. It is also seen that the noticees were collecting and paying Service Tax properly in respect of other services provided by them to other clients. In these circumstances and considering the substantial facts of the claim, I am inclined to invoke Section 80 and set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms.

(Pronounced in Court on 17.03.2017)

Member (Technical)


Additional Info

  • Date Range: Friday, 17 March 2017
  • Court/Authority: CESTAT
  • Tax Type: Service Tax
  • Petitioner/Appellant: M/s Shree Vaibhav Laxmi Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad
  • Respondent: M/s Shree Vaibhav Laxmi Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad
  • Appl no. or Appl year: Appeal No. ST/86515/13
  • Supreme Court Location: Delhi
  • CESTAT Location: Mumbai
  • AAR Location: Delhi
  • Authority: Supreme Court

A New Feature :

Advanced Case Law Search


7th April, 2016

The “Advanced Case Law Search” feature in TaxQuotient  enables search on separate parameters such as Court, Tax Type, Date (from & to Range), appellant, respondent and even keywords. This helps you in locating case law you are searching for swiftly.

TIP: #1 : If you want to view the latest cases, just enter the start and end dates keeping all other boxes blank. You will get a list of all available indirect tax cases during that period.

TIP # 2 : Please keep the date range (start to end date) for upto 6 months.

TIP # 3 : Don't forget to reset the search to clear the earlier results before a new search.

Click to enter Advanced Case Law Search

 GST Bill passed by Parliament




The 122nd Constitution Amendment Bill introduced in Parliament in December 2014 has been passed by the Rajya Sabha and now also by the Lok Sabha with the amendments.  Now the Bill must get ratified by at least half the number of 31 State Legislatures which means 16 States and then finally get the approval from the President.

Thereafter the GST Council has to be set up which will determine the GST design at the granular level. This will include the structure of GST including scope of CGST, SGST and IGST, the taxes subsumed, the items/commodities covered and other critical aspects such as the threshold limits for taxability, exemptions, and several other parameters critical for an ideal  GST.

Further, for the GST to operate smoothly, the taxes paid on goods and services at every stage in the value chain needs to be tracked. This requires an IT infrastructure which will track the transactions and taxes paid and form the back-bone of GST. Reportedly considerable work has been already done on it, nevertheless it will need changes to correctly reflect the GST Law proposed by the GST Council and accepted by the Central & State Legislatures.

Last but not the least,  the tax authorities and other stakeholders who will implement the GST need to be trained for a smooth introduction.

Seven questions to know if you 

are paying taxes 


If you are the CFO or the Tax Head you ought to read this. Click Here

CESTAT Updates

June- July 2016


Brief update on CESTAT judgements passed during June 2016 to July 2016. Please note this update is not a summary of the cases but only leads on important issues decided. The links to the judgments are also provided for the full text.

Click here for update

Our Main Services 

in Indirect Taxes


  • Business structuring and tax planning
  • Review of end-to-end business processes for indirect taxes
  • Strategy to prevent litigation, representation and litigation support
  • Tax compliance and tax control framework
  • Support on specific issues
Go to top