Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Service Tax Rules, 1994

10 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

LAGHU UDYOG BHARATI AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1999 INSC 29327 July 1999Case Allowed

The petitioners, who use the services of goods transport operators and clearing‑and‑forwarding agents, challenged the validity of Service Tax Rules 2(d)(xii) and 2(d)(xvii) (as amended 1997) which made the customers or clients the “person responsible for collecting service tax”. They contended that the rules conflicted

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA-1versusM/S GUJARAT CARBON & INDUSTRIES LTD.

2008 INSC 94618 August 2008Dismissed

The respondents, Gujarat Carbon & Industries Ltd., had hired transport operators before 2003 and were served with a notice demanding service tax on the gross transport charges. The Commissioner of Central Excise relied on sections 70, 73, 76, 77 and 81 of the Finance Act, 1994 and on a retrospective amendment under sec

ADIRAJ MANPOWER SERVICES PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE PUNE

2022 INSC 20118 February 2022Dismissed

The appellant, Adiraj Manpower Services Pvt. Ltd., a manpower recruitment agency, entered into agreements with Sigma Electric Manufacturing to supply personnel for various manufacturing activities. The Commissioner of Central Excise issued a show‑cause notice alleging that the appellant had failed to assess and pay ser

GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 15617 March 2005Dismissed

The petitioners, customers of goods‑transport operators and clearing‑and‑forwarding agents, challenged the constitutional validity of Sections 116 and 117 of the Finance Act 2000 and Section 158 of the Finance Act 2003 which retrospectively validated service‑tax levies that had been struck down in *Laghu Udyog Bharati*

TAMIL NADU KALYANA MANDAPAM ASSN.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 26915 April 2004Dismissed

The Tamil Nadu Kalyana Mandapam Association, representing mandap‑keepers who let out halls and provide catering, challenged the levy of service tax on their services under Sections 66 and 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Rule 2(1)(d)(ix) of the Service Tax Rules, arguing that the tax was in substance a tax on land (a St

MIS. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDversusCOMMR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

2007 INSC 127712 December 2007Dismissed

The Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) entered into a contract with the foreign consultancy SNC Lavalin for engineering services, agreeing to pay the service tax on the foreign company's behalf. KSEB failed to make the payments and argued that, under the Finance Act, 1994, the tax liability rested on the service pro

UNION OF INDIA & OTHERSversusFUTURE GAMING SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. & ANOTHER ETC.

2025 INSC 18110 February 2025Disposed off

The Union of India challenged the liability of several private companies, including Future Gaming Solutions, to pay service tax on the sale of paper and online lottery tickets for the Government of Sikkim. The High Court of Sikkim had set aside service‑tax notices issued under various amendments to the Finance Act, 199

UNION OF JNDIA & ORS.versusBENGAL SHRACHI HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LIMITED &ANR.

2017 INSC 10847 November 2017Disposed off

The Union of India (lessee) and Bengal Shrchi Housing Development Limited (lessor) entered into a three‑year lease for commercial premises. Dispute arose over who should pay service tax on the lease. The High Court held the lessee liable, but the Division Bench reversed, holding the lessor liable based on the Service T

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search