2013 (5) TMI 201 - AT - Service Tax

Disputed issue relating to inclusion of cost of materials used for providing photographic services Held that - The Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Satyam Digital Photo Lab 2011 (9) TMI 199 CESTAT has held that when the law was declared against the assessee subsequently to the period involved, and when the earlier decision were in favour of the assessee, no suppression can be attributed to the appellant so as to justifiably invoked longer period of limitation. We accordingly after dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit decide the appeal also by allowing the same.

Summary

Issues:
Disputed issue of inclusion of cost of materials for photographic services; Invoking longer period of limitation for raising and confirming demand.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi, delivered by Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member, addresses the disputed issue concerning the inclusion of the cost of materials used for providing photographic services. It is noted that a Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Aggarwal Colour Advance Photo System v. CCE had previously decided against the appellant on this matter. However, the Tribunal also considers the aspect of the demand being raised and confirmed by invoking the longer period of limitation.

Regarding the longer period of limitation, the Tribunal refers to a precedent set by the case of CCE v. Satyam Digital Photo Lab, where it was established that if the law was declared against the assessee subsequent to the period in question and earlier decisions were in favor of the assessee, no suppression could be attributed to the appellant justifying the invocation of a longer period of limitation. This principle was upheld in subsequent decisions, including those in the cases of Shobha Digital Lab v. CCE and CCE v. Centre Point Colour Lab.

Considering the settled nature of the issue based on the aforementioned decisions, the Tribunal finds no reason to prolong the appeals pending for final disposal. Consequently, after dispensing with the pre-deposit condition, the appeal is decided by allowing the same, leading to the disposal of the stay petitions and appeals in the manner described.