2013 (12) TMI 564 - AT - Service Tax

Stay application - Penalty u/s 78 - Held that - Demands stand raised by invocation of longer period of limitation. Admittedly, the appellant were filing returns and were paying service tax under a belief that the activities undertaken by him are construction activities, which are entitled to the benefit of abatement. The appellant could be entertaining a bonafide belief that in as much as the activities undertaken by him are relatable to construction activities he would be entitled to benefit of abatement. Service tax is a newly introduced concept and a person may not be fully aware of the detailed technicalities of the law. No inquiries were raised by the Revenue as regards the exact job undertaken by him and no further investigation were made from the appellant as regards the availment of the benefit of the notification. As such, at this stage by prima facie holding that the demand is barred by limitation, we grant unconditional stay to the appellant - Stay granted.

Summary

The judgment concerns a case where the appellant sought to dispense with pre-deposit of service tax and penalties imposed. The appellant was involved in supply and application of epoxy/acrylic putty on buildings. The Revenue disputed the benefit of abatement claimed by the appellant. The tribunal granted unconditional stay to the appellant as demands were raised under longer limitation period without proper inquiry into the nature of the services provided.