TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 650X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the vires of levy of service tax has been challenged and the same has been held as ultra-vires, it cannot be alleged against the appellant that they have not paid the service tax with malafide intention for the part of property let-out to M/s. Vishal Retail Limited. Extended period of limitation - Held that: - nowhere it is coming out from the records that when the investigation was conducted by DGCEI against M/s. Vishal Retail Limited or against the appellant. In that circumstances, the benefit of doubt goes to the appellant therefore, the extended period of limitation is not invokable. Penalty - Held that: - there is no malafide intention for not paying the service tax on the premise let-out to M/s. Vishal Retail Limited therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'ble Apex Court and awaiting the final decision, the show cause notices dated 21.03.2013 and 17.09.2013 were issued to the appellant to demand service tax for the period April 2008 to March 2012 by invoking extended period of limitation. The matter was adjudicated, demand of service tax along with interest and penalty was confirmed against the appellant. Against the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. Ld. Counsel for the appellant is not disputing the levy of service tax and is only disputing the fact that in the situation, the extended period of limitation is not invokable, therefore, the demand pertaining to the extended period is not sustainable and penalty is not imposable on the appellant. 4. On the other hand. Ld. AR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conducted by DGCEI against M/s. Vishal Retail Limited or against the appellant. In that circumstances, the benefit of doubt goes to the appellant therefore, the extended period of limitation is not invokable. As there is no malafide on the part of the appellant, the demand for the extended period of limitation is set-aside and the demand within the period of limitation is confirmed along with interest. As, I hold that there is no malafide intention for not paying the service tax on the premise let-out to M/s. Vishal Retail Limited therefore, no penalty is imposable on the appellant and the same is also set-aside. 6. In view of the above analysis, the appeal is partly allowed as indicated hereinabove. (Order dictated and pronounc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
