TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 302X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not covered under Section 73, as it stood on the date of issuance of the show cause notice. It is admitted fact that the appellant have taken service tax registration and are filing the periodical returns regularly. The appellant have maintained proper books of accounts in the normal course of business. Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Laghu Udyog Bharati [ 1999 (7) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT ], have held the provision of levy under reverse charge basis, as per Rule 2(1)(d) of the Service Tax Rules in the case of GTO service, as ultra virus the Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, in these facts and circumstances and in view of the law pronounced by the Apex Court, it is held that the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked, as admit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , pending adjudication. 3. Brief facts and the chequered history in these appeals is as under:- Dates Events 16.11.1997 to 01.06.1998 The appellant availed services of goods transport operator services. 28.09.2001 A show cause notice dated 28.09.2021 was issued demanding service tax of ₹ 43,89,613/- payable on Goods Transport Operator Services, alongwith interest and penalty. 07.11.2003 The appellants deposited an amount of ₹ 43,89,613/- vide challan dated November 07, 2003 under protest . 03.11.2004 and 10.11.2004 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .05.2000 Introduction of levy of service tax on Goods transport operators, under Reverse charge mechanism , vide Section 116 and 117 of the Finance Act, 2000 enacted on 12.05.2000, revalidating and amending the provisions of Finance Act, 1994 for the period 16.07.1997 to 16.10.1998 (retrospectively). 27.07.2005 The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Meerut vs. LH Sugar Factories Ltd. 2006 (3) STR 715 (SC) held that - person required to file return under Section 71A of the Act was not covered by Section 73 of the Act, as it stood on the date of issuance of the show cause notice. 14.05.2003 Retrospective amendment to Section 68 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice/ corrigenda, issued after 10.09.2004 and within one year of relevant date, prescribed under Section 73 of the Finance Act came up before the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in Emco Elecon Ltd., -2010 (20) STR 603 and the issue was decided against the Department. Further observed that Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of L T Others reported in 2010 (35) STR 32 (Mad.) has upheld the validity to revise show cause notice vide corrigenda issued after 10.09.2004, within a period of one year from the relevant date. 6. Accordingly, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the show cause notice dated 28.09.2001 read with the corrigenda dated 03.11.2004, has been validly issued within the period of one year from 10.11.2003. As such the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and have been overruled. 11. This Tribunal in the subsequent appeal of Agauta Sugar Chemical - 2012 11 TMI 740, after taking note of the judicial development have decided similar issue in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 12. It is further urged by the appellant that corrigenda were issued to the original show cause notice. Thus when the notice itself is invalid or not tenable, the subsequent corrigenda cannot give it a fresh lease of life. Further extended period of limitation is not invokable in the facts and circumstances, there being no contumacious conduct on the part of the appellant, or mis-statement or fraud, which are the condition precedent for invocation of extended period of limitation. Accordingly, he praye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re liable to pay the freight either himself or through his agent for transportation by road in a goods carrier. 14. I take notice that Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Indian National Shipowners Association have held that service tax cannot be levied under reverse charge mechanism prior to 18.04.2006, when Section 66A was introduced and/or inserted in the Finance Act, providing for levy of service tax from the receiver of service, under reverse charge mechanism. This ruling have been confirmed by Hon ble Supreme Court. 15. I further take notice that in para 11 of the show cause notice it is observed that Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Laghu Udyog Bharati by its judgment dated 27.07.1999, have held the provision of levy unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
