9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stacking was within the stockyard premises. Number of Tribunal's decisions have held that such activity cannot be held to be covered by the activity of 'cargo handling services'. - ST/875 & 876 OF 2009 - ST/A/511-512 OF 2012-CUS - Dated:- 2-7-2012 - MS. ARCHANA WADHWA, AND MATHEW JOHN, JJ. M.P. Singh for the Appellant. Sumit Kumar for the Respondent. ORDER Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member - After hearing both the sides, we find that service tax demand stands confirmed against the appellant on the findings that they have provided services to M/s SAIL, falling under the category of 'cargo handling services'. 2. As per the agreement entered into by M/s SAIL, they were required to do the activity of loading, unlo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alue was executed. The appellant after passing of the order of the Asstt. Commissioner started paying duty on the value of the loading and unloading. 5. Subsequently the appellants were issued SCN on 26.03.99 for the period 2003-04 up to November, 2007 alleging that they were required to pay service tax on the consideration received for transportation of the goods within the stockyard as also for stacking of the same. It is seen that part of the said period covered the earlier agreement dtd. 13.07.98 (up to May, 2003) and thereafter new agreement dtd. 05.05.03. Another SCN was issued on 09.04.09 for the period December, 2007 to March, 2008. Both the SCNs stands adjudicated by the Commissioner vide his impugned order confirming service t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e showing the activities in their ST-3 returns, never disclosed about raising of separate bills and as such Revenue never came to know about the value of the services being rendered by them separately. They also admitted in their statement that value realised for transportation and stacking of goods were not being reflected in ST-3 returns. As we have already discussed that as entire agreement was the subject-matter of earlier SCN. The appellants were not reflecting the value of transportation and stacking in their ST-3 returns in terms of earlier order of the Asstt. Commissioner. As such nothing turns on the said fact which stands admitted by the appellants. It is well-settled that for invocation of extended period, the material facts ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
