TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1477X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act signed by the appellant with M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd., it is evident that the service rendered by the appellant is covered under C&F Agent service. Indeed, it is such a good fit that it hardly leaves any room for ambiguity or confusion or doubt. Therefore, it could not have been the bona fide belief of the appellant that the service rendered was not taxable. It is seen that the appellant itself took registration only in the year 2003 as provider of C&FA service and still did not pay the impugned service tax pertaining to the subsequent period. In the present case, to reiterate, there was no scope for confusion or ambiguity or doubt. As regards the contention that the reimbursement of expenses by the service recipient should be deduct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was providing Cargo Handling Service (CHS) and that the reimbursements of expenses towards loading/unloading/transportation should not have been included in the assessable value and the service tax is leviable only on the commission it received @ Re. 1/- PMT. It also stated that it had bona fide belief about its non-liability to service tax. Certain judgments have also been cited. 4. We have considered the contentions of the appellant. We find that the appellant has entered into C FA contract with M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd., which inter alia provided as under :- (i) Appellant was to maintain a godown at the company s cost for storing of the goods and maintains proper records of the receipts and dispatches of the goods. (ii) The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the clearing and forwarding operations in any manner to any other person and includes a consignment agent. As per Section 65(90) ibid, any service provided to a client by a clearing and forwarding agent in relation to clearing and forwarding operations in any manner would amount to a taxable service . From the definition of C F Agent and terms and conditions of C F contract signed by the appellant with M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd., it is evident that the service rendered by the appellant is covered under C F Agent service. Indeed, it is such a good fit that it hardly leaves any room for ambiguity or confusion or doubt. Therefore, it could not have been the bona fide belief of the appellant that the service rendered was not taxa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax and interest is concerned. However, we find that penalties under Sections 76 and 78 ibid have been imposed. It has been held by the Punjab Haryana High Court in the cases of CCE v. First Flight Couriers Ltd. [2011-TIOL-67-HC-P H-ST = 2011 (22) S.T.R. 622 (P H)] and CCE v. Pannu Property Dealers, Ludhiana [2010-TIOL-874-HC-P H-ST = 2011 (24) S.T.R. 173 (P H)] that even if at the relevant time penalties under Sections 76 and 78 ibid were not mutually exclusive, once penalty under Section 78 ibid has been imposed, penalty under Section 76 ibid may not be justified. It is also in effect held by Gujarat High Court in the case of Ratnamani Metals Tubes [2013-TIOL-1124-HC-AHM-CX = 2013 (296) E.L.T. 327 (Guj.)] that if option of reduce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
