9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve heard both the sides. 3. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are as follows: a) The appellant is a caterer and has served food and beverages to the employees of M/s EID Parry (India) Ltd., Alwar as per agreement with the said company. The appellant was not having any business premises of their own to run their business independently. They were given space by M/s EID Parry in their own factory/ place for the purpose of preparing and supplying the food to employees of the said company. The space was given without any rent. The food items were supplied at concessional rates to the employees. The subsidy involved was reimbursed to the appellant by M/s EID Parry. b) The Original Authority held that the appellant was running the servi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is leviable based on actual realization. In this case, the tax has been levied only w.e.f. 10.9.2004. The service tax confirmed includes tax for services rendered from September, 2004 onwards which is not legally correct. b) The authorities below have not given the benefit of cum-duty and taken the entire realization as value of taxable service. c) It is a case of pure interpretation of law and that they are a small time service provider and they have since closed the business activity because of the service tax liability. They should be given the benefit of Section 80. They have paid demanded duty along with interest in spite of hardship faced by them. 5. The learned DR submits that even if the appellant was not having a business premi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances and the arguments pleaded on behalf of the appellant in to account, we hold that this is a fit case for extending the benefit under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. 7. In view of the above, we hold:- a) The appellant is required to pay service tax under the head 'outdoor catering service' for the period from 10.9.2004 along with interest at the applicable rates; b) The original authority will re-determine the duty liability taking into account our observations and directions as above. c) The penalty is not sustainable and accordingly we set aside the same. 8. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. (Operative part of the order pronounced in the open Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
