9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 427X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x was paid at any point of time from the date of audit till date. Waiver of Pre-deposit - Assesse had failed to make out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of the entire amount of tax and penalty - assesse was directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1.5 crores – stay granted partly. - ST/452/2010 - - - Dated:- 19-2-2013 - Pradip Kumar Das Mathew John , JJ. For the Appellant : Ms Aparna Hirandagi, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri D P Naidu, SDR PER : Pradip Kumar Das The applicant is engaged in the manufacture of various excisable goods. It has been alleged that they have provided service to M/s. Bunge Agribusiness India Pvt. Ltd. (BAIPL) during the period from 01.04.2003 to 09.07.2004, as a Clearing and Forwarding Agen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... either they are providing transportation nor they are receiving the goods. 3.0 The learned authorised representative for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the Commissioner. He submits that as regards the demand of GTA service, the applicant has not substantiated any evidence, as has been detailed in the findings of the Commissioner. He further submits that as regards the figures contained in the ledger accounts, wherein the payments made are accounted head-wise. He also submits that the claim of the applicant that the amount unpaid is without any evidence. It is also submitted that the demand was made on 25% of the freight charges collected after allowing an abatement of 75%. 3.1 Regarding demand of tax on Clearing and Forwarding A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. Hence, prima facie, we agree with the findings of the Commissioner that the applicant claimed deduction of Rs.48 crores as 'Provision' from the freight amount, without explaining as to what is a 'Provision'. Regarding the demand of tax on Clearing and Forwarding Agent's Service, we find that with effect from 09.07.2004, the applicant paid tax under "Business Auxiliary Service" which was not disputed by the Department. The present case is prior to 09.07.2004. Hence, the demand of service tax as Clearing and Forwarding Agent's prior to the said period would be looked into after examining the agreement in detail at the time of appeal hearing. 5.0 After considering the overall facts of the case, we find that the applicant has failed to mak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
