2014 (6) TMI 202 - AT - Service Tax

Service Tax liability - business auxiliary services - Revenue contends that appellant had shown miscellaneous income received as documentation charges during the course of high sea sales - Held that - show cause notice proceeds on the ground that this activity will fall under the category of business auxiliary services without pin-pointing the correct head in the said BAS, will the income fall. First appellate authority has also not discussed this relevant point which was raised by the appellant before him during the time of appeal was filed. Prima facie, we are of the view that amounts received for the documentation charges for the sale made on high sea sale basis, may not be covered under the category of business auxiliary services. In view of this, we find that the appellant has made out a prima facie case for the waiver of the amounts involved. Application for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved is allowed and recovery thereof stayed till the disposal of appeal - Stay granted.

Summary

Issues involved: Service Tax liability on the appellant under the category of business auxiliary services.

Analysis:
The case involved a stay petition for the waiver of pre-deposit of an amount confirmed by the adjudicating authority and upheld by the first appellate authority. The main issue was the Service Tax liability on the appellant under the category of business auxiliary services based on the miscellaneous income received as documentation charges during high sea sales. The Tribunal considered the submissions from both sides and reviewed the records.

The Tribunal noted that the show cause notice did not specify the correct head under which the income would fall, alleging it to be business auxiliary services. The first appellate authority also failed to address this crucial point raised by the appellant during the appeal. Upon prima facie examination, the Tribunal opined that the amounts received for documentation charges in high sea sales may not actually fall under the category of business auxiliary services. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the appellant had established a prima facie case for the waiver of the amounts in question.

As a result of their analysis, the Tribunal allowed the application for the waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved and stayed the recovery until the appeal was disposed of. The decision was dictated and pronounced in court by the members of the Tribunal, Shri M.V. Ravindran and Dr. P. Babu.