9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it partly. - ST/1936/2010 - 543/2012 - Dated:- 26-3-2012 - S/Shri P.G. Chacko, M. Veeraiyan, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri M.S. Nagaraja, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Ganesh Haavanur, Addl. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. The appeal is delayed by 84 days and the appellant has prayed for condonation of this delay. On a perusal of the averments contained in the COD application, we note that the officer of the company who was in-charge of Taxation Finance had resigned and was relieved of his duties in June 2010, that his substitute took charge in July 2010, that the decision for filing the appeal was taken at the registered office in Mumbai upon the order-in-original receiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service. The impugned demand of Service tax is on these collection charges. 4. It further appears from the records that on no occasion was the appellant able to remit their collections to the AAI within 15 days and therefore the penal interest was attracted. The collection charges payable to the appellant by AAI were set off against the penal interest leviable from the former by the latter and this adjustment took place during the period of dispute. The case of the appellant is that the collection of PSF on behalf of the AAI did not constitute Business Auxiliary Service , that in any case service tax was not chargeable as the collection charges were not received from AAI, that the factum of collection of PSF and its remittance to AAI wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant at the rate of 18% on the PSF collected and retained by them till its remittance to AAI. It would appear from these adjustments that collection charges were eventually received by the appellant from AAI. These charges constituted the taxable value for the impugned levy. As regards the plea of limitation, we find that an amount of service tax of approximately Rs. 70 lakhs is within the normal period and this amount is prima facie recoverable from the appellant on merits. We have also considered the plea of financial hardships contained in the stay application. In support of this plea, the learned counsel has shown us the balance sheet for the year ended March 31st, 2010, which indicates an accumulated loss of over Rs. 4,000 cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
