9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 189 - AT - Service TaxHiring of buses - Hiring of buses to Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) for consideration - Liability of Service Tax - amount received by the appellant from APSRTC for the period 2008-09 to December, 2011 - Held that - this Bench in the case of M.D. Yousuf Pasha and others 2017 (8) TMI 70-CESTAT - Hyderabad held that service tax along with interest needs to be upheld, but set aside the penalty - there is no reason to deviate from such a view already taken by the Tribunal - the confirmation of tax liability along with interest is correct - penalties set aside - appeal allowed in part.
Issues:
Service tax liability on amount received from APSRTC for the period 2008-09 to December 2011. Analysis: Issue 1: Condonation of Delay The Tribunal considered an application for condonation of delay of 31 days in filing the appeal. The delay was justified, leading to the allowance of the application for condonation of delay. Issue 2: Absence of Appellant Representation Despite the absence of representation from the appellant, the Tribunal proceeded with the appeal based on the judgment of the Bench in a previous case involving similar issues. Issue 3: Service Tax Liability The core issue was the service tax liability on the amount received by the appellant from APSRTC for the mentioned period. The appellant had rented out buses to APSRTC, receiving consideration. Lower authorities confirmed tax demands, interest, and penalties on the received consideration. Issue 4: Precedent and Tribunal's Decision Referring to a previous judgment upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the Tribunal upheld the service tax liability along with interest. However, the penalties imposed by lower authorities were set aside based on the established precedent. Issue 5: Disposal of Appeal In alignment with the Tribunal's decision on the tax liability and penalties, the appeal was disposed of accordingly, confirming the tax liability with interest while setting aside the penalties. This judgment underscores the importance of considering established precedents in tax liability cases, ensuring consistency in decisions while also providing a fair opportunity for appellants to justify delays in filing appeals.
|
