9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 448X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t showing that the excess income was being earned by the party by suppressing the value of rent a cab services, we prima facie agree with the appellant that they have a strong case - Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected their legal issue of even rent a cab service not being a taxable service on the ground that it has been raised for the first time before him and is hit by the provision of Rule 5. O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The appellant is registered as provider of rent a cab services and was discharging its service tax accordingly. Based upon the scrutiny of balance sheet and income tax return, showing more income, Revenue entertained a view that the appellant has suppressed its income generated from rent a cab service and has thus evaded service tax. 3. In view of the above, proceedings were initiated against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame as they are running their cab on per k.m. basis in which case they are not covered by the definition of rent a cab. 5. The Commissioner (Appeals), instead of deciding the issues on merits, held that the appellant has raised additional plea before him for the first time and in terms of Rule 5 of the Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, 2001, an assessee cannot raise the issue for the first time b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facie agree with the appellant that they have a strong case. We accordingly, dispense with the condition of pre-deposit of any amounts. 6. Further, Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected their legal issue of even rent a cab service not being a taxable service on the ground that it has been raised for the first time before him and is hit by the provision of Rule 5. On going through the said rules, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
