2008 (4) TMI 311 - AT - Service Tax

Photography Service Exemption under notification no. 12/2003 ST dated 20-6-2003 - Stay application allowed by granting waiver of pre-deposit of the amount and staying its recovery till the disposal of the appeals

Summary

Issues: Determination of service tax liability and penalty for M/s. Sudha Digital Images; Requirement to show details of inputs in invoices for photography services; Benefit of Notification No.12/2003-S.T. and Board's letter F. No. 233/2/2003-CX. 4; Applicability of cited judgments in similar cases.

Analysis:

1. The appellants, M/s. Sudha Digital Images, were directed to pre-deposit a service tax amount of Rs. 3,64,812/- along with a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- as per the Order-in-Appeal No.14/2007. The issue revolved around whether the appellants must disclose input details in their photography service invoices. The appellants, registered under photography services, sought the benefit of Notification No.12/2003-S.T. and Board's letter F. No. 233/2/2003-CX. 4. However, this benefit was denied due to the absence of relevant records to verify correct tax calculation and payment. The appellants argued against the necessity of showing separate input details, citing precedents favoring their stance.

2. The learned Counsel contended that the matter was settled in previous cases, including M/s. Jyoti Art Studio & Ors. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad and Shilpa Colour Lab v. CCE, Calicut, where judgments supported the appellants' position. The Counsel emphasized that all parties should receive the Notification benefit. In response, the learned DR proposed obtaining para-wise comments from the Commissioner for a comprehensive review.

3. After careful consideration, the Tribunal found the issue aligned with the referenced judgments. Consequently, the stay application was granted, waiving the pre-deposit requirement and halting recovery pending appeal disposal. The case was scheduled for final hearing on 19th May 2008, ensuring a fair and thorough examination of the matter.

This judgment highlights the importance of legal precedents in resolving tax liability disputes and emphasizes the need for proper documentation to support claims for benefit under relevant notifications. The decision to grant a stay on recovery pending appeal demonstrates the Tribunal's commitment to a just and thorough adjudication process.