TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was issued on 07.01.2016, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked for confirmation of the adjudged demand and the same should only be confined to the normal period. The impugned order cannot be sustained on the ground of limitation - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. ST/87418/2017 - A/87649/2018 - Dated:- 12-10-2018 - Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) Shri Prasad Paranjape, Advocate for appellant Shri M.K. Sarangi, Jt. Commr (AR) for respondent ORDER Per: S.K. Mohanty This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 07.07.2017 passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Pune II. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is enga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued in this regard was adjudicated vide order dated 24.11.2016, wherein the service tax demand of ₹ 17,30,668/- was confirmed along with interest and penalties were imposed under Section 77 and 78 of the Act. The said adjudged demands were confirmed on the appellant under the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Act. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the issue of payment of service tax on banking and other financial services by the recipient of service was contentious and there were divergent views of the Tribunal with regard to levy of service tax on the recipient of such services. In this context, he has relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Tata Steel Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eet prepared during the disputed period. With regard to levy of service tax on various expenses incurred for obtaining the ECB loan, I agree with the submissions that the appellant had genuinely entertained the belief that it was not a service receiver and since, the banks provide such service to it, they should be considered as the actual receiver of the disputed service and the service tax liability, if any, to be borne / paid by them. I also find that with regard to levy of service tax on various expenses incurred for providing loans by the banks, there were conflicting views expressed by the Members in the Division Bench, for which the matter was referred to the 3rd Member for redressal of the dispute. Thus, under such circumstances, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
