9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (9) TMI 24 - AT - Service TaxActivity of benefication/washing of raw coal - demand of service tax under Business auxiliary services - Held that - As decided in ARYAN ENERGY (P) LTD. Versus COMMR. OF CUS. & C. EX. HYDERABAD-I (2008 (5) TMI 248 - CESTAT BANGLORE) the benefication/washing of raw coal is the activity of mining which was introduced for the purpose of service tax w.e.f. 01.06.07 with no retrospective effect - The period involved in the present appeal is upto 31.03.06 no service tax was leviable on above activity prior to 01.06.07 - in favour of assessee. cargo handling services - Held that - The appellants have accepted their tax liability in respect of cargo handling service and have deposited the entire tax liability - against assessee. Penalty on non-payment of tax on cargo handling services - Held that - As said services were being provided by the appellants as an excelsior to the impugned services of benefication of coal there could be a doubt on the part of the appellants that service tax is not payable on the same - benefit of Section 80 can be extended to set aside the penalty imposed on the appellants - in favour of assessee.
Issues:
1. Whether the activity of benefication/washing of raw coal undertaken by the appellant falls under taxable service category of 'business auxiliary services'? 2. Whether service tax is leviable on the 'cargo handling services' provided by the appellant during a specific period? 3. Whether penalties imposed on the appellant are justified for the alleged tax liabilities? Issue 1: Benefication/Washing of Raw Coal Activity: The Appellate Tribunal analyzed the appellant's agreement with various entities for coal washing at a washery, where raw coal was processed to produce clean coal and rejects. The Show Cause Notice proposed service tax on the activity, categorizing it as 'business auxiliary services.' The Commissioner confirmed the demand, penalties, and interest. The Tribunal referred to a previous case and concluded that benefication of coal is part of mining, becoming taxable only from 01.06.07. As the present appeal pertained to a period before this date, the Tribunal set aside the service tax confirmation and related penalties. Issue 2: Cargo Handling Services Tax Liability: The Tribunal upheld the confirmation of service tax on the 'cargo handling services' provided by the appellant, involving loading, unloading, and transportation of goods related to coal washing. The appellant accepted the tax liability for these services and had already deposited the tax amount. However, considering that there might have been confusion regarding the tax applicability on these services, the Tribunal invoked Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994, to set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant for non-payment of the demand related to cargo handling services. Issue 3: Penalties Imposed: Regarding the penalties imposed on the appellant, the Tribunal set aside the penalties related to the benefication of coal activity due to the non-leviability of service tax before 01.06.07. For the penalties imposed on the cargo handling services, the Tribunal considered the appellant's doubt about the tax liability and granted relief under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. Consequently, the penalties on both counts were set aside. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant by setting aside the service tax confirmation and penalties related to the benefication of coal activity due to non-leviability before 01.06.07. However, the confirmation of service tax on cargo handling services was upheld, with penalties waived considering the appellant's doubt on tax liability.
|
