9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 108 - AT - Service TaxBusiness Support Service - transmission and distribution of electricity - Benefit of Notification No.45 /2010 ST dt . 20.07.2010 - Held that - Notification has been interpreted by this Tribunal in the case of M.P.Power Transmission Co. Ltd. (2011 (2) TMI 982 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI) and later followed in the case of Noida Power Co.Ltd . Vs. Commissioner of C.Ex . Noida 2013 (8) TMI 746 - CESTAT NEW DELHI wherein it has been held that no service tax is required to be paid for rendering services in relation to transmission and distribution of electricity during the period mentioned in the said Notification. We have no reason to disagree with the said decisions of the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal. Besides, in view of the clarification issued by the Board, the Appellant- assessee are eligible to the benefit of the said Notification. In the result, the impugned Order is set aside to the extent of confirming the demand against the Appellant - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Challenging Order-in-Original on service tax classification and penalties. Analysis: The Appeals were filed by the Assessee-Appellant and the Revenue challenging the Order-in-Original dated 21.01.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Kolkata. The services provided by the Assessee-Appellant were alleged to fall under 'Business Support Service' and a taxable service under the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner partially dropped the demand for Service Tax but confirmed a significant amount and imposed penalties. Both parties appealed against the decision. The Appellant's counsel argued that Notification No.45/2010 dated 20.07.2010 exempted service tax for services related to transmission and distribution of electricity until 21.06.2010. Referring to a previous case, the counsel highlighted that the Tribunal had allowed an appeal based on this notification. The Revenue's Special Counsel did not dispute the notification but cited a Supreme Court judgment stating that such notifications do not eliminate pending liabilities. However, the matter was referred to the CBEC for clarification. The CBEC clarified that the Supreme Court's observation did not set a precedent and that the notification applied to all pending cases. The Tribunal found that the Assessee-Appellant was indeed engaged in providing services related to electricity transmission and distribution during the period in question. Citing the notification, the Tribunal held that no service tax was required to be paid for the disputed period. Relying on previous decisions and the Board's clarification, the Tribunal set aside the demand against the Appellant and allowed their appeal. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed for lacking merit. In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the Assessee-Appellant based on the exemption notification, setting aside the demand and penalties imposed. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed accordingly.
|
