Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1022 - AT - Service TaxCargo handling services - Silo Charges - demand of service tax - Held that - From the records it is seen that the appellant has paid sales tax not only on the transaction price of coal but also on the silo loading charges - there is no justification for the demand of service tax - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Appeals dealing with service tax demand, interest, and penalties for the period from April 2003 to November 2012. Analysis: 1. The appellant, engaged in mining and coal supply, entered into an agreement with a buyer for coal supply. The dispute arose regarding the recovery of additional charges termed as "Silo Charges" for loading coal onto railway wagons. The department viewed these charges as liable for service tax under Cargo Handling Services, leading to demand notices and penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The appellant argued that the transaction's value should be considered at the railway wagon, including silo charges, as per the agreement terms. They highlighted that sales tax was initially paid without silo charges but later included them. They also mentioned the payment of Central Excise duty from April 2011, where coal value, including silo charges, was considered. 3. The appellant cited instances where the Jurisdictional Commissioner dropped service tax demands for periods after the dispute. They relied on case laws and a Supreme Court decision emphasizing the exclusion of sales tax and service tax on the same transaction. 4. The department defended the impugned orders, leading to a detailed hearing and examination of records by the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that similar disputes were addressed previously, citing a case where service tax demands were dismissed based on the payment of sales tax, following the Supreme Court's observation on the exclusivity of sales tax and service tax. 5. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no justification for the service tax demand, setting aside the impugned orders and allowing the appeals based on the precedent and legal principles discussed during the proceedings.
|