TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y stayed. - ST/240/2008 - S/174/2010-WZB/C-II/CSTB - Dated:- 21-6-2010 - S/Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (J) and S.K. Gaule, Member (T) REPRESENTED BY: Shri R.G. Sheth, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Manish Mohan, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: P.C. Chacko, Member (J)]. - In this application, the appellant seeks waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of service tax of over Rs.3.67 crores for the period July 2003 to September, 2004, as also in respect of various penalties imposed on them. The impugned demand was raised in a show-cause notice dated 29.9.05 which invoked the extended period of limitation on the alleged ground of suppression of facts by the appellant. The demand is under the head 'Bus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the applicants based on prescribed documents; f. return any application indicating discrepancies/deficiencies for re-submission with necessary corrections/rectifications; g. issue prescribed acknowledgements for PAN applications; h. digitize the data from PAN application forms; i. transmit the digitized data to the server at National Computer Center (NCC) of Income tax department or any other place named by the department. Upon completion of this job, as outsourced by the Income Tax department, the department would allot PAN to the applicants/assessees from the NCC, whereupon the appellant would print PAN cards having hologram and other security features and colour photograph of applicants as per design approved by the department. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... echnology service from its ambit. It is submitted that information technology was used in the preparation of PAN cards and therefore anything connected with the preparation of PAN cards would not attract the definition of "business auxiliary service". It has also been claimed that the appellant was undertaking a function on behalf of the Income Tax department and, therefore, it was not exigible to service tax. In this connection, the learned Counsel has relied on the Board's Circular no. 89/7/ST dated 18.12.2006, as also a few decisions of this Tribunal such as Commissioner vs. CMC Ltd. 2007 (7) STR 702 (Tri-Bang). In the context of his submission that the job undertaken by the appellant was not 'incidental' or 'auxiliary' to any of the pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im exemption from payment of service tax on the premise that they were undertaking a statutory or sovereign function. To this extent, the learned SDR's arguments are prima facie valid. The question, however, is whether the job undertaken by the appellant for the Income Tax department could be brought within the ambit of the service mentioned at clause (iv) of section 65(19) ibid. We have found a similar factual situation in the case of Gandhi and Gandhi Chartered Accountants vs. Commissioner (supra). In that case, the relevant clause "any incidental or auxiliary support service such as computerized data processing etc." was held to be independent of the services named prior thereto under section 65(19). The words "incidental" and "auxiliary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
