2014 (12) TMI 965 - AT - Service Tax

Cargo Handling Services - Whether the Appellant were eligible to claim the benefit of exemption from the levy of Cargo Handling Services in relation to the cargo meant for export - Held that - Assessee could not adduce sufficient evidences to establish that the cargo which they handled, were meant for export. Consequently, the demand was confirmed by the ld. Commissioner. Now, the Appellant claim that they could procure necessary documents, to establish that the cargo in question for the relevant period, were meant for export, and also they would place necessary documents/certificates in support of their claim. However, we find that the said certificate and documents relate to 56% of the demand. The ld. Advocate for the Appellant submits that they are now in the process of procuring the documents for the remaining quantity of goods. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we are of the view that the matter may be remanded to the ld. Adjudicating Authority for considering the evidences afresh, that would be placed by the Appellant - Matter remanded back - Appeal disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
Application seeking waiver of predeposit of Service Tax, penalty under Section 78, and penalty under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The eligibility of the Appellant to claim exemption from the levy of 'Cargo Handling Services' in relation to cargo meant for export.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an Application seeking waiver of predeposit of Service Tax amounting to &8377; 54.90 lakh, along with penalties imposed under Section 78 and Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Applicant had been rendering services under 'Cargo Handling Services' related to loading Iron Ore Fines for export during the period from 2006-07 to 2010-11. The demand was confirmed due to insufficient evidence presented before the adjudicating Commissioner, as relevant export documents were not available at that time. The Applicant, through their Advocate, admitted this lapse but mentioned that they have now procured necessary documents and a Chartered Accountant's Certificate covering 56% of the demand. An offer to deposit &8377; 5.00 lakh was made, requesting a remand to the adjudicating Authority for further consideration.

The Revenue did not object to remanding the case for review. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, decided to dispose of the Appeal at that stage. The main issue revolved around whether the Appellant was eligible for exemption from the levy of 'Cargo Handling Services' concerning cargo meant for export. The Appellant claimed to have obtained the required documents to establish the export nature of the handled cargo for 56% of the demand. They assured the procurement of the remaining documents soon. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter to the adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration based on the forthcoming evidence. The Appellant was directed to deposit &8377; 5.00 lakh within eight weeks and report compliance to the adjudicating Commissioner for further proceedings. The Commissioner was instructed to provide a reasonable opportunity for a hearing. The Appeal was allowed by way of remand, and the Stay Petition was also disposed of.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the waiver of predeposit of Service Tax and penalties, focusing on the Appellant's eligibility for exemption from 'Cargo Handling Services' levy on export cargo. The decision to remand the case for fresh consideration based on newly procured evidence demonstrates a fair approach to ensure justice and proper evaluation of the Appellant's claims.