2008 (8) TMI 241 - AT - Service Tax

Appellants submit that none of impugned services is includable in the CHA services and also submitted that the majority of the demands are barred by time CCE & ST has dropped the proceedings on impugned issue in Chennai Prima facie, all the details were known to the Department. The assessee has made out a strong case with regard to the limitation appellants are regularly paying the service tax of huge amount and hence, the Revenue s interest is safeguarded stay is granted partly

Summary

Issues:
1. Requirement of pre-deposit of service tax amount.
2. Penalty under various sections of the Finance Act.
3. Allegations of non-payment of service tax on specific services.
4. Issue of time-bar regarding services rendered.
5. Discrepancies in the demands raised by the Revenue.
6. Arguments on limitation and details provided to the Department.
7. Acceptance of relief claimed by the appellant.
8. Stay application and pre-deposit conditions.
9. Compliance and consequences of non-compliance.

Analysis:

1. The appellant was directed to pre-deposit a substantial service tax amount along with penalties under different sections of the Finance Act due to an Order-in-Original. The total amount to be pre-deposited was Rs. 3,96,51,830/-, with additional penalties imposed for failure to make timely payments.

2. The charges against the appellant included non-payment of service tax on various services such as CCX fees, Break Bulk fees, and Profit share from origin, among others. Penalties were imposed under Section 76, Section 77, and Section 78 of the Finance Act for non-compliance.

3. The appellant raised the issue of time-bar, arguing that the services in question were rendered between 2000 and 2004, and they had already discharged service tax for other services during that period. They contended that the demands made by the Revenue were mostly time-barred.

4. The Commissioner had previously dropped proceedings related to some charges, indicating discrepancies in the demands raised by the Revenue. The appellant provided detailed explanations and evidence to support their claim that they were not liable to pay tax for certain services.

5. The appellant's counsel highlighted that the Revenue had accepted orders dropping proceedings for some charges, and they were willing to deposit a certain amount to secure the Revenue if granted time. The appellant offered to deposit Rs. 50,00,000/- within three months.

6. After considering arguments from both sides, the Tribunal acknowledged the appellant's strong case regarding limitation and accepted their plea at a prima facie stage. The Tribunal allowed the stay application subject to the pre-deposit of Rs. 50,00,000/-, with the balance tax and penalty amounts waived upon deposit.

7. Compliance was set to be reported by a specific date, with non-compliance leading to dismissal of the appeal. The Tribunal scheduled the final hearing for the appeal, considering the significant revenue involved and subject to compliance with the pre-deposit conditions.