TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 824X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Act are absent in this case. Thus, part of the confirmed adjudged demand is barred by limitation of time. The service tax demand has also been confirmed within the normal period of limitation, which should be paid by the appellant. Appeal allowed in part. - Appeal No. ST/53597/2014- [DB] - ST/A/51631/2018-CU[DB] - Dated:- 20-3-2018 - Mr. S.K. Mohanty, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the Service Tax Department. During the period from April, 2007 to March, 2012, the appellant did not deposit the Service Tax amount in respect of P.F./E.S.I. reimbursement and labour charges received from the service receiver, M/s Bhilwara Chittor Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Limited. Upon scrutiny of the records maintained by the appellant, the Department initiated show cause proceedings, seek ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led, justifying invocation of longer period of limitation. He also referred to the opinion dated 11.09.2006, obtained from the Service tax consultant, opinioning that on the reimbursement of statutory levies of P.F./E.S.I. etc., received from the service receiver, the appellant is not liable to pay any service tax. Thus, it is his submission that the demand confirmed by the Department is barred by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S.I. and P.F. etc. Further, the consultant also opined that no Service Tax is required to be paid on the labour charges. Thus, in our considered view, the ingredients mentioned in the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Act are absent in this case. Thus, part of the confirmed adjudged demand is barred by limitation of time. We find that the service tax demand has also been confirmed within the normal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
