Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2014 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (8) TMI 378 - CESTAT AHMEDABADRevision of refund claim - Discrepency on scrutiny of refund of service tax - Terminal Handling Charges - Held that:- show-cause notice had clearly observed that service tax was paid under the category of port services by the service providers. Even though the charge was named as “Terminal Handling Charges”, tax liability was in fact, discharged under port services which is one of the specified services under Notification No. 41/2007-S.T., dated 6-10-2007. Without revising classification of the service at the end of service provider, denial of refund of service tax paid under the category of port service at the receiver’s end is not correct. If service tax is not refunded on the ground that it was for Terminal Handling charges which is not a specified service, is not correct. In any case, Terminal Handling was not a separate service during the relevant time nor at this time. It falls under the category of port services only. Moreover, it is quite possible that Terminal Handling Charges are collected by CHA/Service Provider of the appellant and paid to persons who actually did not work. In view of the fact that Service Tax paid under the category of port services, the action taken by the Commissioner to deny service tax is not in accordance with law - impugned order is required to be set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.
|