TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 92X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ivity is of merely collecting and getting the negative processed from photo labs and further handing over the same to the customers. Extended period of limitation - Held that:- Having been held as a non taxable service by above circular of the Board, there could be a bona fide belief on the part of the assessee not to pay service tax on the said activity - The appellant themselves approached the Board for clarification and as such it cannot be said that there was any mala fide on their part so as to justifiably invoke the longer period of limitation - demand raised against them is hit by the bar of limitation. However, smaller portion of demand (for appellant’s activity of enlargement of negatives, which is taxable) may fall within th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned order passed by the Original Adjudicating Authority confirming the demand to the extent of ₹ 3,27,136/-(Rs. Three lakhs twenty seven thousand one hundred and thirty six only) alongwith confirmation of interest and imposition of identical penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. In addition penalty of ₹ 12,000/-(Rs. Twelve Thousand only) and of ₹ 5,000/- (Rs. Five thousand only) were imposed under Section 77 of the Act read with Section 70. Further penalty of ₹ 2,72,248/- (Rs. Two lakhs seventy two thousand two hundred and forty eight only) stands imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. The said order of the Original Adjudicating Authority stands confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the issue was not free from doubt as is clear from the Board s Circular dated 27.12.2001 and as such, no mala fide can be attributed to the appellant for invoking the longer period of limitation. Learned Advocate submits that a part of the demand would fall within the limitation period and he is ready to pay the same. He also prays for setting aside the penalties. 5. As is clear from the fact that the Board s Circular dated 27.12.2001 referred (supra) has clarified the issue that the collection centre who merely collects the exposed film from their clients and gets it developed from other processing lab, will not be covered by the Photography Services. Though the appellant was having a photography studio but we are of the view that such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
