TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 630X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en out of order in original dated 28.12.10 which means that before 2010, it was in the knowledge of department that appellant who is an authorised dealer of M/s. General Motors for selling the vehicle. Therefore, allegation against the appellant that they have suppressed the fact that they are authorized dealer of General Motors is not correct. Admittedly, show cause notice was issued by invoking the extended period of limitation. In these circumstances, show cause notice cannot be issued to the appellant by invoking the extended period of limitation. Therefore, the demand in the impugned order has been confirmed by invoking the extended period of limitation which is not sustainable. Consequently, impugned order is set aside. - Decided in f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irmed the demand of service tax along with interest and also imposed penalty equivalent to the amount of service tax on the appellant. Against the said order appellant is before me. 3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the show cause notice has been issued by invoking the extended period of limitation which is not sustainable as the issue whether the trading activity is exempted service or not was decided by this Tribunal in the case of Orion Appliances Ltd. [2010 (19) STR 205 (Tri-Ahmd)] on 7.5.2010 and it was held by this Tribunal that trading activity not an exempted service and credit of input service attributable to trading activity was not admissible. He further submits that in 2009 on 4.12.2009 this Tribunal in the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of limitation. 6. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 7. The appellant is contesting the issue only on limitation not on merits. The allegation in the show cause notice is that appellant has suppressed the fact that appellant is an authorized dealer of General Motors. Infact the fact has been recorded by this Tribunal in order passed by this Tribunal in appellants own case vide order dated 4.11.11 reported in wherein it has been recorded that appellant is an authorised dealer of vehicle manufactured by M/s. General Motors. This observation has been made by this Tribunal on 4.11.2011 in appeal which has been arisen out of order in original dated 28.12.10 which means that before 2010, it was in the knowledge of department t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
