TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that cost of materials is not includible - ST/254-255/2008 - 1404-1405/2008 - Dated:- 6-10-2008 - Shri T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T) Ms. Joy Kumari Chander, JCDR, for the Appellant. Shri Anil Kumar, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Revenue has filed these appeals against the following orders passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Guntur. Sl. No. Appeal No. Name of the party Order-in-Appeal No. Amounts involved Service Tax (Rs.) Penalty (Rs.) 1. ST/254/2008 CCE, Tirupathi v. P.V. Narayana Reddy 16/2008 (T) ST dated 29-2-2008 4,58,500/- 9,17,000/- 2. ST/255/2008 CCE, Tirupathi v. P.V. Naray ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aterials utilized in providing service of photography. He has stated that the dissolved firm R.K. Colour Lab, Karnool, had registered under the Service Tax Registration and had been filing the returns regularly. The firm was later dissolved. They surrendered the registration and there was an order of cancellation of the registration w.e.f, 1-4-2000. However, after the above mentioned date, show cause notice was issued for differential service tax for the period from 16-7-2001 to 31-3-2004. Relying on the various case-laws, the Commissioner (Appeals) has concluded that after the assessments have been completed and after the dissolution of the firm, Revenue cannot take any action for revision of the assessment and there is no provision for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g against a dissolved firm, the provisions of other allied acts can always be invoked in the given circumstances. The original adjudicating authority in his OIO clearly held that as per the Section 25 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 every partner is liable for all acts of the firm done, while he was a partner and that the liability was both joint and several. Dissolution of the firm or surrendering of the Registration Certificate (in fact not cancelled by the department so far) cannot make a firm/its partners free from their liability. Simply surrendering of the registration certificate of a dissolved firm does not entitled it or its partners from not proceeding against for recovery of tax liabilities. (ii) When ST-3 returns were file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2007 (207) E.L.T. 207 (Kar.) (b) D. Matai v. CCE, Mumbai - 2000 (126) E.L.T. 1264 (Tri.-Mum.) Show cause notice issued after the death of the sole proprietor of the concern to legal heir of proprietor and the proprietary concern not sustainable in absence of such provision in the Central Excise Act or under the rules-Section 11A of Central Excise, Act, 1944 Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. 9. It was stated that no objections were raised at the time of surrender of the registration certificate. Moreover, during the relevant period in terms of Rule 4(7) of the Service Tax Rules, only surrender of the registration certificate has been contemplated. The relevant provision read as under: "(7) Every registered assessee, who ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5) E.L.T. 90 (Bang.) (f) Vasavadatta Cement v. CCE - 2006 (206) E.L.T. 592 (Bang.) (g) GTN Enterprises Ltd. v. CCE - 2006 (200) E.L.T. 76 (Bang.) (h) Modern Extrusion v. CCE - 2007 (211) E.L.T. 120 (Bang.) (i) Dolphine Detective Agency v. CCE - 2006 (4) S.T.R. 25 (Bang.). 11. It was also urged by the learned Advocate that on merits the issue is settled by this Bench's decision in the case of Shilpa Color Lab others v. CCE - 2007 (5) S.T.R. 423 (Bang.), which has taken into consideration even the case of C.K. Jidhesh v. UOI reported in 2006 (1) S.T.R. 3 (S.C.). The above decision was overruled by a three member Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. UOI reported in 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|