2018 (8) TMI 561

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ef facts of case are that the appellant were facilitating financial Companies like ICICI, HDFC etc, to place their counters/desks in the premises of the appellant's Auto Mobile Show room. In response, the said Financial Companies were giving the appellant a substantiated amount under the head of commission/incentive/remuneration etc. The case of the department is that the said commission amount is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... conflicting in the various decisions of this Tribunal and finally it was resolved by the Larger Bench in the case of Pagariya Auto Centre-2014 (33) S.T.R. 50 (Tri-Lb), therefore, the demand raised for the period July 2003 to December 2005 in which Show Cause Notice dated 09.05.2007, issued is time barred as there is no malafide intention of the appellant. He further submits that the penalties und .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t, as regard the taxability of the services, the same has been settled against the appellant by the Larger Bench in case of Pagariya Auto Centre (Supra). Therefore, the demand on merit is sustainable. As regard, the limitation we find that the appellant have neither registered themselves nor filed any ST-3 return. In such a situation department was absolutely unaware about the activity of the appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X