9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the demand of Service Tax and imposition of penalty u/s 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Service Tax Demand Issue: The appellant, an Advertising Agency, filed an appeal against the demand of Service Tax of Rs. 80,275 confirmed by the Commissioner for certain months in 2003. The appellant's activities included various services falling under taxable services related to advertisements. The appellant contended that they were carrying out separate activities - one subject to Service Tax and the other subject to VAT. They believed that the value of printing charges where only VAT was paid should not attract Service Tax. The Commissioner confirmed the demand for the period before a specific notification and dropped it for the subsequent period. The Tribunal found that the appellant's belief was genuine, and since no penalty was imposed by the Commissioner, the demand for the extended period was set aside. The appeal on this issue was allowed. Imposition of Penalty Issue: Regarding the imposition of penalty u/s 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, the Tribunal noted that the Commissioner did not impose any penalty despite confirming the demand for Service Tax for the extended period. The Tribunal observed that the same factors that would warrant a penalty were present for invoking the extended period. Since no penalty was imposed, the Tribunal held that the demand confirmed by invoking the extended period of limitation was not sustainable and set it aside. Consequently, the appeal was allowed on this issue as well.
|
