9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 911X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arding agent services – in favor of assessee - ST/404/2007 - ST/A/24/2012-Cus.(PB) - Dated:- 12-1-2012 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Shri Rakesh Kumar, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri R. Santhanam, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri K.K. Jaiswal, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. The demand of service tax of Rs. 3,85,032/- stands confirmed against the applicant appellant along with imposition of penalties under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 for the period 1-9-1999 to 9-7-2004 on the findings that during the said period, the appellant has rendered the services of clearing forwarding agents . In addition penalty of Rs. 500/- stands imposed u/s 75 of and Rs. 5,500/- u/s 77 of the Finance Act, 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osed penalties. The order passed by the original adjudicating authority stands confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals), hence the present appeal. 6. We have heard Shri R. Santhanam, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant and Shri K.K. Jaiswal, ld. DR appearing for the Revenue. 7. It is a fact that the appellants subsequently got registered under the category of business auxiliary service w.e.f. 1-9-2004. Such registration stands accepted by the Revenue and the appellants were discharging their service tax liability accordingly. 8. Without going into the detailed discussion, we note that an identical dispute was the subject matter of the Tribunal s decision in the matter of Hanuman Coal Co. v. CCE, Kanpur reported in 2011 (22) S.T. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding agent services. In the present case also, the appellants are registered under the category of business auxiliary service w.e.f. 1-9-2004. As such on above ground also,they are entitled to relief. 11. Apart from above, the Tribunal in the case of Hanuman Coal Co. also held demand barred by limitation which plea is also available in the present case. 12. We also note that in subsequent judgment in case of Kavery Coal Suppliers v. CCE, Kanpur reported in 2011 (23) S.T.R. 35 (Tri.-Del.), the identical issue was held to be not covered by the definition of clearing forwarding agent. 13. In view of the fact that the issues stands covered by the above two decisions of the Tribunal, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
