9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 318X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s' as defined under section 65 (20) of the Finance Act 1994 and therefore, the appellants were needed to pay Service Tax on the gross amount received by them from the recipient of 'multi system operations service' which are primarily 'input service' for 'cable network services'. The period of demand under the impugned show cause notice is from 10.9.04 to 30.6.06. In the above show cause notice service tax demand of Rs. 11,35,750/- was confirmed by the original adjudicating authority. Penalties under section 76 and Section 78 were also imposed. The appellants have gone before Commissioner (Appeals) against Order-in-Original wherein the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the Order-in-Original. The appellant is before us against the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a) is still in operation and it has not been withdrawn subsequent to the necessary changes which has been effected on 10.9.04 in the definition of cable services. The learned advocate has also cited this Tribunal decision in the case of CCE, Jaipur II vs. Sky Media Pvt. Ltd. [2017 (11) TMI 1466 CESTAT New Delhi] wherein it has been held by this Tribunal that since during the period of dispute, there was a genuine confusion in the mind of assessee about the taxability on the kind of service provided by them under the category of 'cable operator service' and therefore, the extended time proviso is not leviable following various decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in this regard. 1. Cosmic Dye Chemicals vs. CCE [1995 (75) ELT 721 (SC)]; 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r service' and therefore, we opine that the appellant assessee should have discharged their Service tax liability with effect since 10.9.2004. Thus, we hold that the activity of appellant is leviable for service tax w.e.f. 10.9.04 and therefore, confirmation of short payment of service tax by the lower authorities is legally correct and as per the provisions of law. 6. Coming to the question whether the extended time proviso, circumstances in which the appellant operated is invokable or not, we are of the view that appellants being old assessee of the service tax were very much aware about the day today developments in the provisions of the Service Tax Act. It is wrong on their part to say that the CBEC Circular dated 1.8.2002 has made the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
