9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 597 - AT - Service TaxReturn u/s 70 - effect of amendment, retrospective or prospective? - invocation of section 73 of the Finance Act, 1993 - demand - Held that - the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Vadodara-I Vs. Gujrat Carbon & Industries Ltd. 2008 (8) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue, and held that the amended Section 73 covers the case of assesses who are liable to file return under Section 70. In respect of GTA, the liability to file return was cast on the appellant s u/s 71A. The class of persons who come under Section 71A is not brought under the net of Section 73 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
1. Demand of Service Tax on Clearing & Forwarding Agent services and Goods Transport Agency Service. 2. Applicability of Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1993. 3. Interpretation of case laws related to similar circumstances. 4. Retrospective operation of provisions. 5. Validity of show cause notices. Analysis: 1. The judgment addresses a show cause notice issued for the demand of Service Tax on the services of Clearing & Forwarding Agent and Goods Transport Agency Service for specific periods. The matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority previously, and in the de novo adjudication, the proceedings were dropped. However, the Ld. Commissioner confirmed the demand of Service Tax along with interest in the impugned order-in-revision, refraining from imposing a penalty. This led to the appellant filing an appeal challenging the decision. 2. The Tribunal considered various case laws cited by the Ld. Counsel, including the case of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. Vs. CCE, Meerut, to analyze the applicability of Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1993. The Tribunal referred to the liability to file returns under Section 70 and Section 71-A, emphasizing that during the relevant period, Section 73 applied only to assessees liable to file returns under Section 70. The Tribunal quashed the order demanding service tax, highlighting that service receivers were not required to file returns under Section 70 before 2003. 3. The judgment delves into the interpretation of case laws such as CCE, Vadodara-I Vs. Gujarat Carbon & Industries Ltd., Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad-Vs. Shetkari SSK Ltd., and others to establish the legal precedent. It notes the dismissal of appeals by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in certain cases and the agreement of the Court with the conclusions of the Tribunal regarding the non-maintainability of show cause notices under Section 73 for certain assessees. 4. The issue of the retrospective operation of provisions is raised, with the learned counsel for the revenue arguing against the sustainability of the Tribunal's view due to retrospective application. However, the judgment aligns with the conclusions drawn in previous cases and emphasizes the position that show cause notices invoking Section 73 are not maintainable for certain classes of assessees based on the legal interpretation provided by the Tribunal and upheld by the Court. 5. Ultimately, considering the decisions, facts, and legal aspects of the case, the Tribunal sets aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal filed by the appellant and disposing of the cross objection. The judgment concludes that the impugned order cannot be sustained in light of the legal precedents and dismisses the appeal accordingly.
|
