2014 (2) TMI 244 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre deposit - Stay of recovery - Demand of service tax - Notification No. 12/2003-ST - Denial of benefit on the ground that the goods/ material in issue were consumed in the taxable service of repair of transformers, defined under Section 65 (64) read with Section 65(105)(zzg) of the Finance Act, 1994 - Held that - Following decision of Aggarwal Colour Advance Photo System vs. CCE, Bhopal 2011 (8) TMI 291 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI (LB) - Since in earlier circumstances absolute waiver has already been granted - Therefore, Stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of service tax, interest, and penalties assessed; Denial of claim for exemption based on Notification No. 12/2003-ST; Interpretation of the taxable service of repair of transformers under Section 65 (64) and Section 65(105)(zzg) of the Finance Act, 1994; Comparison with a previous case granting unconditional stay.

Analysis:

The judgment deals with the application seeking waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of service tax, interest, and penalties assessed by the adjudication order. The appellant, an assessee, claimed exemption under Notification No. 12/2003-ST, which exempts the value of goods and material sold by a service provider from service tax, provided there is documentary proof specifically indicating the value of the goods and material. However, the claim was denied on the grounds that the goods/material were consumed in the taxable service of repair of transformers, as defined under Section 65 (64) read with Section 65(105)(zzg) of the Finance Act, 1994.

The Tribunal referred to a previous case, Samtech Industries, where unconditional stay was granted in similar circumstances. The Revenue argued that they have an arguable case to sustain the adjudication order, citing a decision in Aggarwal Colour Advance Photo System vs. CCE, Bhopal. Despite this, considering the precedent set by the Tribunal in granting absolute waiver of pre-deposit and unconditional stay in identical situations, the Tribunal decided to grant the waiver of pre-deposit and stay of all further proceedings pending disposal of the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal disposed of the stay application by granting the waiver of pre-deposit and stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order in the original case. This decision was based on the Tribunal's previous ruling in a similar case, emphasizing the importance of consistent application of legal principles in such matters.