9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 376X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o divergent views of various judicial /quasi-judicial authorities on the issue of inclusion of cost of goods in the assessable value of photography services, there could be a bonafide doubt on the part of the assessee. Therefore demand raised in 2009 for the period 2003-2006 is hopelessly barred by limitation. In favour of assessee - ST/2878/2012 - ST/A/634/12-Cus - Dated:- 1-10-2012 - Archana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es. 3. Demand of Service Tax was raised on the said ground by way of issuance of show cause notice on 6.3.2009 for the period 2003 to 2006 i.e. by invoking the longer period of limitation. Such demand stand confirmed along with imposition of penalties. 4. Learned advocate appearing for the appellant fairly agrees that the issue on merits stand against them by the Larger Bench decision of the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh vs. Satyam Digital Photo Lab [2012 (27) STR 64 (Tri-Del)]. 5. While examining the aspect of limitation, we find that the Tribunal in the case of Shobha Digital Lab has taken note of the Government Circular F. No. 233/2/2003 CX-4 dated 7.4.04 addressed to the Punjab Colour Lab Association vide which it was clar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant so as to invoke the extended period of limitation. Learned AR refers to the observations made by the adjudicating authority that details were asked from them in the year 2008 which the appellant failed to provide, the same cannot be held to be a good reason for invokation of longer period of limitation. Inasmuch as the demand is up to the period 2006 the appellants were paying Service Tax on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
