Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 235 - CESTAT NEW DELHIShort payment of duty - period from 01.07.2003 to 31.03.2006 - Cargo Handling service or not - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the appellants have provided manual labour for loading of urea and charcoal and thereafter for unloading the collection of loose urea for the internal shifting in the premises of M/s. DCM Shriram Consolidated Ltd. The entire shifting is otherwise done from the conveyer belt of the factory and the goods are actually used for being transported within the factory. It becomes clear that merely a fact of urea being loaded, the entire said activity does not qualify the aforesaid definition. Commercial and Industrial Construction Services - Benefit of N/N. 15/2004 dated 10.09.2004 - inclusion of value of free supply of material by the service recipient - HELD THAT:- There is no error in the order vide which the tax liability for commercial and industrial construction services for ₹ 13,54,295/- has been confirmed. Maintenance and repair services - HELD THAT:- It is an undisputed fact that appellants are discharging their liability qua the services post 16.06.2005. The Adjudicating authority has failed to consider the said aspect. Hence, the confirmation of demand for painting work of ₹ 33,660/- is liable to be set aside - the differential demand in respect of maintenance of railway track is hereby set aside. Canal closure - HELD THAT:- The adjudicating authority has failed to consider that this activity was not for commercial purposes despite acknowledging that the canal site was owned by the Government of Rajasthan. The order confirming the demand of ₹ 34,379/- is, therefore, liable to be set aside. Excavation services - HELD THAT:- The appellants have relied upon the certificate given by Ghiya services, the sister concern of the appellant declaring that they have duly paid service tax on the taxing higher income received from DCM Shriram Consolidated Ltd. to whom the taxis taken on rent from Khandelwal Construction Co. during the year 2004-05 and 2005-06 were supplied also that no service tax credit has been taken by them. The document is very much on record. But the adjudicating authority has failed to consider the same - Once the service tax liability stands already discharged, any confirmation of the demand for the same amount and the same period shall amount to double taxation, which is not permissible under statute - demand set aside. Time Limitation - HELD THAT:- The appellant was under the bonafide belief otherwise also there is no evidence of the Department to prove any positive act on part of the appellant, which may amount to suppression or mis-representation of the facts that too, with an intent to evade payment of tax - the SCN dated 22.10.2008 proposing the demand for the period 01.07.2003 to 31.03.2006 has gone beyond the normal period of one year without the entitlement of the Department to invoke the extended period. Hence, the show cause notice as such, is held to be barred by time. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|