9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 423X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s. B.H.H. Securities Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the applicant") against the confirmation of Service Tax of Rs.2,09,298/- for the period from 1995-96 to 1996-97 as confirmed in Order-in-Appeal dated 30.12.2010. The penalty also imposed equal to tax amount under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 by the original adjudicating authority and penalty amount has been reduced by the Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o Rs.2,09,298/-. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the demand is time barred. He further submitted that demand is on amount collected as "Vyaj Badla Transactions". At that time there was confusion prevailing in the market and applicant was under bonafide belief that such transaction would not attract Service Tax. He further contended that the brokerage was brought unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Section 11 demand of Service Tax from the successor Pvt. Ltd. Co. is not maintainable and accordingly, they have strong case for granting stay to them. 4. Learned Deputy Commissioner (Authorised Representative) appearing for the Revenue reiterated the findings of lower authorities. She submitted that the proprietorship concern was looked after by the same person. In the Balance Sheet they hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsferred to B.H.H. Securities Pvt. Ltd. under Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, has some force. I find that the applicant has a strong prima facie case in their favour on the ground of limitation as well as on account of conversion of proprietorship concern to a Pvt. Ltd. Company on 26.12.1997. Accordingly, the pre-deposit is waived and stay is granted against the recovery of the Service Tax a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
