Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 956 - AT - Service TaxBusiness Auxiliary Services - business of brewing and bottling of beer at its plant in Aurangabad - non-payment of service tax - manufacture and sale of alcoholic beverages to the customers/indenters of UBL as per the instruction of UBL - demand alongwith interest and penalty - Date of amalgamation/transfer of Appellant’s brewery unit with M/s Skol Breweries Ltd. In the scheme of arrangement - Time Limitation - HELD THAT:- The arrangement/agreement for manufacture and sale of branded alcoholic beverages between the appellant and M/s Skol is a complex one; even though the appellant is authorised to sale the manufactured branded beer in the local market, but the customers/indenters are as per the instruction of M/s Skol; the sale price is fixed by M/s Skol after mutual consultation. Thus it is not a simple provision of service agreement, where under, the service is flown from appellant to M/s Skol and the consideration is received against the service rendered. Determination of value - Production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of, the client - Held that:- in determining the taxable value, in the present circumstances, Notification 39/2009 dt. 23.9.2009 has been issued, allowing deductions on the value of inputs used in the manufacture/processing of alcoholic beverages, subject to the conditions laid down there under. Cessation of service tax liability - Date of amalgamation/ merger between the service provider and principal - Held that:- Date of amalgamation/ transfer of the Appellant’s brewery unit with M/s Skol Breweries Ltd. In the scheme of arrangement as per Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 for amalgamation of the Appellant’s brewery division with M/s Skol Breweries Ltd. - HELD THAT:- The ‘appointed date’ i.e. as on 31.3.2009 be taken as the date of amalgamation/merger of the Brewery Division with M/s SKOL as sanctioned by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court. Time Limitation - HELD THAT:- The fact that the Appellant had manufactured beer, affixed the brand name of SKOL and supplied it to them or sold to the customers of M/s SKOL is known to the department. Therefore, there was no suppression of fact, hence, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked - demand is barred by limitation. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|