2008 (12) TMI 77 - AT - Service Tax

Demand relates to the service tax payable on the alleged port services rendered appellant applied for registration under CHA and C & F services, but Department gave them the registration only as CHA - Revenue has already been informed the details of the activities undertaken by the appellants - under CHA services in terms of the Board s Circular, service tax paid on 15% of the gross receipt prima facie, the appellants have strong case in their favour on merits and limitation stay granted

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Requirement of pre-deposit of service tax and penalties under various sections.
2. Alleged port services rendered by the appellants.
3. Invocation of longer period for demand.
4. Decision of the Tribunal in a similar case.
5. Justification of demands by the Commissioner.
6. Consideration of case laws and limitation.
7. Granting full waiver of pre-deposit.
8. Stay application and final hearing date.

Analysis:

1. The appellants were directed to pre-deposit a substantial sum towards service tax, penalties under Section 78 of the Finance Act, and other penalties by an Order-in-Original. The demand was related to alleged port services provided by the appellants. The appellants had previously applied for registration under CHA and C & F services, but were registered only as CHA. The appellants contended that they had informed the Department of their activities and had been paying service tax under CHA services. The advocate argued that there was no suppression of facts and cited a previous decision of the Tribunal, affirmed by the Karnataka High Court, to support their case.

2. The learned SDR supported the demands made by the Commissioner, emphasizing the justifications provided in the comments submitted by the Commissioner. However, upon careful consideration, the Tribunal found that the appellants had a strong case in their favor based on established case laws and the issue of limitation. Additionally, the Tribunal noted that in a previous stay application by another party, full waiver of pre-deposit was granted in a similar issue. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to order a full waiver of the dues demanded in the impugned order.

3. The Tribunal allowed the stay application, preventing the Revenue from recovering the disputed amount until the appeal was decided. The final hearing of the matter was scheduled for a specific date, along with the appeals of another party. The decision was pronounced and dictated in the open court, ensuring transparency and clarity in the proceedings. The Tribunal's judgment provided relief to the appellants by granting a full waiver of the pre-deposit amount, considering the legal aspects and precedents involved in the case.