TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 467X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rental charges for cycle stand is not found satisfying the provisions of Rule 2(l) of the Rules - credit not allowed. Penalty imposed to the issue of service tax under reverse charge - Held that: - There was indeed lack of clarity in the matter during the relevant period - penalty set aside. Appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant. - ST/41672/2016 - 42411/2016 - Dated:- 5-12-2016 - Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Shri M. Kannan, Advocate, For the Appellant Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR), For the Respondent Order Facts of the case are that appellant is a manufacturer and also obtained service tax registration for transportation of goods by road service. During audit, following appar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant and hence no relief was granted. Ld. Counsel submits that they do not dispute the denial of service tax credit on rental charges paid for cycle stand. However credits with regard to catering services may be allowed following the aforesaid Tribunals order. 2.1 In respect of the controversy of liability of service tax paid under reverse charge, Ld. Advocate submitted that in this matter also they did not dispute disallowance of tax liability, however there was considerable doubt and confusion on the issue and only after the law attained finality in the case of UOI Vs Indian National Ship Owners Association -2010 (17) STR J57 (SC) , the law was settled. In the circumstances, there was no justification for imposition of penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... harge, appellants have not disputed their liability but are aggrieved only against imposition of penalty. I find that the submissions made by learned advocate do have merit. There was indeed lack of clarity in the matter during the relevant period till the judgement of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI Vs Indian National Ship Owners Association cited supra. 6. In the event, I hold that - (i) input service credit of ₹ 3,99,300/- availed on outdoor catering services during the period from June 2007 to June 2009, cannot be denied and the appeal in respect of this issue is allowed, subject to appellants deducting any amount that were recovered from the employees as cost of such catering. (ii) input service credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
