9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Liability of the appellants to pre-deposit service tax, interest, and penalties. 2. Nature of Money Transfer Service provided by the appellant. 3. Demand of service tax under "Business Auxiliary Service" category. 4. Plea of time bar due to no suppression of facts. 5. Granting waiver of the amount demanded in the impugned order. Analysis: 1. The judgment dealt with the liability of the appellants to pre-deposit certain amounts, including service tax, interest under Section 75, and penalties under Sections 76 and 78. The appellants were involved in providing Money Transfer Service under an agreement with a company acting as the representative of Western Union. The Revenue demanded service tax amounting to Rs. 1,15,756/- for a specific period. However, during the hearing, the appellant raised the issue of time bar, claiming no suppression of facts. As a result, the Tribunal decided to grant a full waiver of the amount demanded until the appeal is finally decided. All recovery proceedings were stayed, and no coercive measures were to be taken during this period. 2. The appellant's business involved providing Money Transfer Service under the brand name "Western Union Money Transfer Service." They had an agreement with a company authorized to offer such services on behalf of Western Union in India. The appellant received compensation based on a percentage of the Regular Fee and any gain from currency conversion associated with the money transfer. The nature of the service provided by the appellant was crucial in determining the applicability of service tax under the "Business Auxiliary Service" category. 3. The Revenue proceeded against the appellant demanding service tax under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service" for the period specified. The demand was based on the appellant's activities related to providing Money Transfer Service under the agreement with the company representing Western Union. The Tribunal considered this aspect in the context of the appellant's plea regarding the time bar and the absence of suppression of facts during the proceedings. 4. The appellant, through their learned Advocate, pleaded time bar during the hearing, emphasizing the lack of suppression of facts. This plea was significant in the Tribunal's decision to grant a full waiver of the amount demanded in the impugned order until the appeal is finally decided. The issue of time bar played a crucial role in the resolution of the case and the determination of the appellant's liability for the service tax, interest, and penalties. 5. In light of the appellant's plea regarding the time bar and no suppression of facts, the Tribunal decided to grant a full waiver of the amount demanded in the impugned order until the appeal is decided. This decision aimed to ensure fairness and proper adjudication of the case without imposing undue financial burden on the appellant during the appeal process. The Tribunal also directed the Registry to link the case with the appeal for final hearing on a specific date, indicating the procedural steps to be followed in resolving the matter.
|
