TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 819X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore intention of the legislature is clear that prior to 1.5.2006, the services provided by an individual was not to be treated as service provided by commercial concern. Moreover in this case, show cause notice has been issued by invoking extended period of limitation whereas there is no suppression on the part of the appellant that appellant being a commercial concern suppressed the fact from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the appellant is providing Business Auxiliary service being individual i.e. Shri Pratap Singh Jyala during the period 2004-2005 and 2005-2006. The show cause notice was issued on 26.6.2008 by invoking extended period of limitation to demand service tax from the appellant under the category of Business Auxiliary services. Both the lower authorities confirmed the demand against the appellant along ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice has been issued by invoking extended period of limitation. It is in dispute whether the appellant can be treated as commercial concern or not is a matter of interpretation. Therefore, extended period is not invokable. 4. On the other hand, learned AR supported the impugned order and submits that adjudicating authority has relied on certain case laws namely, CCE vs. Employ Me [2006 (111) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the activity of profit then same can be called as commercial or not. Therefore, said case law is not relevant to the facts of the present case. As in the case of Laxmi Engineering Works (supra), the Hon ble Apex Court has treated the commercial concern as sole proprietorship. The said case is not applicable to the facts of the present case as appellant is not a proprietorship concern. Further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pressed the fact from the department not to pay the service tax. In these circumstances, I hold that appellant is not required to pay service tax for the period 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 under the category of business auxiliary service being an individual by invoking extended period of limitation. 7. Therefore, impugned order is set aside. Appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
