Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (9) TMI 588

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Railways, are inter alia engaged in the activities of Renting of Immovable Property Service, Sale of place or time for Advertisement Service and Mandap Keeper Service. These services are rendered during the period 1.5.2006 to 31.12.2007, 01.6.2007 to 31.12.2007 and 2003-04 to 31.12.2007 respectively. However, they did not discharge Service Tax liability. Therefore, the department issued a show-cause notice dated 19.4.2010 along with addendum dated 20.7.2010 demanding Service Tax amounting to Rs.1,28,22,481/- along with interest thereon and also proposing to impose penalties. The notice was adjudicated vide the impugned order and demand of Service Tax alongwith interest thereon was confirmed and equivalent amount of penalty was imposed under .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f stay against the impugned demands. 4. The learned Addl. Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue submits that Indian Railways is an organization working on commercial basis, therefore, they are liable to pay Service Tax wherever services are rendered on commercial basis. As per the provisions of Service Tax Act, any person rendering the taxable services to any other person is liable to pay Service Tax. The 'person' referred to in the law is a juridical person and the juridical person includes within its scope "Government" also. In the instant case, the Railways have suppressed information relating to the activities undertaken by them and, therefore, the demands have been correctly made invoking the extended period of time. Accordingly .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t it is contended on behalf of the States that in the scheme of our Constitution no distinction has been made between direct and indirect tax and therefore this distinction is not relevant to the present controversy. It is true that no such express distinction has been made under our Constitution, even so taxes in the shape of duties of customs (including export duties) and excise, particularly with a view to regulating trade and commerce in so far as such matters are within the competence of Parliament and are covered by various entries in List I to which reference has already been made, cannot be called taxes on property; they are imposts with reference to the movement of property by way of import or export or with reference to production .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 does not define the 'person' liable to pay Service Tax and same is defined only in Rule 2(d) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, this argument is also not correct because as per Section 68(1) of the Finance Act, 1994, every person providing taxable service to an person shall pay Service Tax at the rate specified under Section 66 in such manner and within such period as may be prescribed. Therefore it is the service provider who is liable to pay Service Tax and only in specified situations as provided for sub-section (2) of Section 68, a person other than the service provider notified by the government is liable to pay Service Tax. Even if, in a case, the person is notified under the rules as the person liable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t or government departments indulge in evasion of taxes either by suppression or by willful mis-statement. Further since the question of time bar is both a question of law as well as a question of fact, this issue can be considered at the time of final disposal of the appeal. 5.5 There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the activity undertaken in the instant case by the appellant falls within the definition of renting of immovable property, sale of space or time for advertisement service or mandap keeper services as defined under Section 65(19)(a), 65(105)(zzzm) and Section 65(105)(m) of the Finance Act, 1994 respectively. Therefore, we are prima facie of the view that the appellant M/s Central Railways, are liable to discharge Ser .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates