Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2013 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (5) TMI 57 - AT - Service TaxServices rendered by goods transporters - Service tax demanded from the Appellant as receiver of the service as per provisions of Rule 2(d)(xvii) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, during the period 16-11-1997 to 2-6-1998 - whether the retrospective amendments made were good enough for collecting the tax liability from the service receivers who did not file any returns and did not pay the tax - Held that:- As decided in CCE v. Eimco Elecon Ltd. [2010 (7) TMI 477 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] till the point of time Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 came to be substituted w.e.f. 10-9-2004 provisions of the said section could not be made applicable despite retrospective amendment in Sections 68 and 71A of the Finance Act, 1994. In these circumstances, admittedly, the assessee could not be faulted with for not having filed a return after getting himself registered. More particularly, when one considers the language employed in the Proviso below sub-section (1) of Section 68 and the provisions of Section 71A of the Finance Act, 1994, it is not possible to state that the language of the Statute is so clear that any default can be fastened on the respondent-assessee. Thus following the decisions of the High Courts as cited above and hold that the demands issued after in 2004 or later in respect of the short levies in dispute in the three cases filed by assessees are not maintainable.
|