TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 924X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... situation, it cannot be alleged by the department that the appellant have arbitrarily bifurcated the value of services rendered by him under two types of invoices/ bills. The invoices which have been raised by the appellant are as per the legally valid work contracts/ agreements and it is accepted legal principle that for the purpose of levy of service tax, the individual contract need to be taken into account. Therefore, merely on the assumption that the appellant have entered into separate contracts intentionally to evade service tax is prima-facie, not acceptable. Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- The appellant has regularly been filing their ST-3 returns wherein all the details of services provided by them have been mentioned. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iding manpower and for goods transport purpose by M/s. JK Paper Limited. The appellant were issuing separate invoices for providing services i.e. Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service and Goods Transport Agency service as per work order. The service tax has been paid on both the invoices, in case of Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service by the appellant himself and for Goods Transport Agency services by recipient of services i.e. M/s. JK Paper Limited being a listed Company. 2. The department has undertaken an audit of financial statements of the appellant and was of the opinion that the appellant was providing a composite service and for evading service tax, the composite work was bifurcated between two agreements i.e. one ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss value as per provisions of Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994. So far as service under the category of Goods Transport Agency service is concerned, the service recipient has complied with the provisions of Rule 2(1)(d) of Service Tax Rules, 1994, where the said rule provides that whenever the consignor or consignee of goods is Specified Person‟, the person liable for paying service tax shall be any person who pays or is liable to pay freight either himself or through his agent for transportation of such goods by road in a goods carriage‟. The list of Specified Persons inter-alia covers any Company which is formed and registered under the Companies Act. Since the appellant is a proprietorship concern and the service recipient ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith reference to transportation and administration charges and which are liable to service tax and separate bills have also been issued then there is no question levying service tax on transportation charges which is being executed under separate agreement. 3.3 Learned Advocate has also assailed the impugned order-in-appeal on the ground that without proving any fraud, collusion, willful misstatement and suppression of facts with an intention to evade payment of service tax, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed service tax under extended time proviso of Section 73 of Finance Act, 1994. It has further been mentioned by the learned advocate that each and every transaction has been entered by the appellant in his books of accounts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aving heard both the sides, we find that there is no denying of the fact that appellant has entered into two separate work contracts/ agreements for providing two different services namely Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service and Goods Transport Agency services. It is matter of record that the appellant has been filing their ST-3 returns regularly and have discharged service tax liability on providing Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service as per provisions of law. The second work contract was for providing Goods Transport Agency services on which the service recipient M/s. JK Paper Limited being a Specified person has discharged service tax liability as per the provisions of Rule 2(1)(d) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onfirmed by invoking extended time proviso under Section 73(1) of Finance Act, 1994. We find that the appellant has regularly been filing their ST-3 returns wherein all the details of services provided by them have been mentioned. The service recipient has also been filing ST-3 returns and therefore, it cannot be alleged that there is any element of fraud, collusion, mis-declaration or suppression of facts with intent to evade service tax. We also take note of the fact that demand itself has been made from the financial record of the appellants which is mentioned in the audit report No. FAR/241/ST/2011-12 dated 08.02.2012. Therefore, we are of the opinion that there is no suppression of facts, fraud or misstatement with intent to evade paym ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
