TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ul suppression and therefore extended period cannot be invoked in such a situation. There is no evidence of fraud or suppression of fact. The certificates, issued by the respective State Governments, to the effect that the said proprietary concerns are registered as Factories have also been submitted by the Appellant before the authorities concerned and before me as well. A perusal of the same will lead to inevitable conclusion that the proprietary concern to whom GTA services were provided by the appellant, were authorized dealers of Piggio Auto and were registered as factories therefore in view of Section 68(2) ibid read with Notification (supra) those they are liable to pay service tax under reverse charge mechanism. Therefore the dem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir service recipients. According to revenue, on the basis of the data available with the department, it appears that the appellant were providing taxable services, but they neither paid the due service tax leviable thereon nor filed the ST-3 returns for the aforesaid period. Accordingly a letter dated 5.10.2018 was issued to the appellant asking them to submit certain details/documents as mentioned in the said letter. According to the department, the appellant neither disclosed the complete and correct taxable value received by them, nor did they discharge the service tax liability or the taxable service provided by them during the period 2013-14 to 2014-15 and these acts on the part of the appellant appeared to have been committed by way ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice (GTA) by the appellant way back in the year 2016 itself when the department issued a letter dated 29.1.2016 to the appellant on the basis of information received from the Income Tax Department, asking for the information of gross receipts for the F.Y. 2012-13 and the required information was submitted by the appellant to the department on dated 10.3.2016 stating therein that in case of goods transport service, the service tax liability is to be cast upon the person who is liable pay freight; that in reply to the aforesaid communication, the Range Officer further wrote a letter dated 16.3.2016 asking for some more information and the required information was supplied by the appellant vide letter dated 31.3.2016 and thereafter no further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d a letter dated 29.1.2016 to the appellant on the basis of information received from the Income Tax Department, asking for the information of gross receipts for the F.Y. 2012-13 and the required information was submitted by the appellant to the department on dated 10.3.2016 stating therein that in case of goods transport service, the service tax liability is to be cast upon the person who is liable pay freight. In reply to the aforesaid communication, the Range Officer further wrote a letter dated 16.3.2016 asking for some more information and the required information was supplied by the appellant vide letter dated 31.3.2016 and thereafter no further communication was received by the appellant from the department and a presumption was draw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edge of the department since January, 2016, when the department issued a letter dated 29.1.2016 to the appellant on the basis of information received from the Income Tax Department, asking for the information of gross receipts for the F.Y. 2012-13 and the required information was submitted by the appellant to the department on 10.3.2016 and thereafter again on 31.3.2016. Since thereafter no further communication was received by the appellant from the department so the appellant rightly presumed that they are not liable to pay any service tax for the aforesaid service. Although the aforesaid submissions were made before the adjudicating authority also, but there is no discussions about it in the impugned order. It clearly shows that the depa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orship concerns are the factories registered under the Factories Act/ Rules and therefore as per section 68(2) of the Act r/w Notification 30/2012-ST dated 20.6.2012, the total service tax was payable by the recipient of the GTA services, who made payment of freight to them. The certificates, issued by the respective State Governments, to the effect that the said proprietary concerns are registered as Factories have also been submitted by the Appellant before the authorities concerned and before me as well. A perusal of the same will lead to inevitable conclusion that the proprietary concern to whom GTA services were provided by the appellant, were authorized dealers of Piggio Auto and were registered as factories therefore in view of Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
