2012 (8) TMI 568 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre-deposit - demand of Service Tax was confirmed on account of money transfer services - contention of assessee is that it is covered under export of services - Held that - delivery in the instant case, is complete only when it is received by the recipient in India. Therefore, the service provided by the applicant would not be covered under export of services applicant is directed to make a pre-deposit of 25% of demand

Summary

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax and penalty imposed under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.
2. Whether the services provided by the applicant fall under the category of export of services.

Analysis:
1. The applicant sought a waiver of pre-deposit of a substantial amount of Service Tax and penalties imposed under various sections of the Finance Act, 1994. The demand arose from a case booked by the DGCEI regarding money transfer services provided on behalf of a foreign principal. The applicant contended that since the services were provided to a principal located outside India, they should be considered as export of services and hence not liable for Service Tax. The applicant relied on Tribunal decisions and legal provisions to support their claim for waiver.

2. The main contention revolved around whether the services provided by the applicant could be classified as export of services. The Revenue argued that the services were not eligible for such classification as they were delivered and used in India, contrary to the requirements for export of services. The Tribunal analyzed the relevant legal provisions and amendments to the Export of Services Rules, 2005. It was observed that the services provided by the applicant did not meet the criteria for export of services as they were delivered and used in India. The Tribunal also distinguished the case from previous decisions cited by the applicant, emphasizing the specific facts and legal provisions applicable in the present case.

3. Additionally, the Tribunal addressed the issue of time limitation raised by the Commissioner in the order. The Commissioner highlighted instances where the applicant allegedly suppressed material facts, leading to delays in providing information during the investigation. The Tribunal considered this aspect while evaluating the applicant's plea for a total waiver of pre-deposit. Ultimately, the Tribunal directed the applicant to make a partial pre-deposit in the interest of justice, based on the balance of convenience and the likelihood of prejudice to the Revenue's interest.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the applicant's claim for total waiver of pre-deposit, emphasizing the lack of a prima facie case and financial hardships. The decision highlighted the importance of compliance with tax regulations and the need to balance the interests of both parties involved in the appeal.