9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 563X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the period 2004-05 to 2009-10. But it is also true that they could not substantiate their claim that they were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 34/2004-ST Dated- 03.12.2004 as the freight amount paid by them in most of the cases were below Rs.750/- per single trip and Rs.1500/- for double consignment. This claim of the Appellant needs verification by the lower authorities. Both si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x under Notification No. 34/2004-ST Dated 03/12/2004. Pursuant to the Audit officer s report, they were issued with a SCN alleging non payment of Service Tax amounting to Rs.28,733/- on the transport charges of Rs.9,59,061/- incurred during the said period. On adjudication, the said demand was confirmed and penalty under various provisions were imposed on appellant. On Appeal, The Ld. Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as categorically submitted that necessary documents and evidences in support of above submission are available with him which could not be produced before the lower authorities. 4. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the appellant could not establish before the lower authorities by way of documentary evidences of the claim made by them that they were entitled to Exemption Notification No. 34/2004-ST Dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rity for verification of the claim of the appellant that the transportation amount paid by them satisfy the condition under Notification No. 34/2004-ST Dated-03.12.2004 and also in some cases where they have availed Service Tax from GTA, necessary service tax was paid by the service provider i.e. goods transport agency. Needless to mention that a reasonable opportunity of hearing be granted to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
