9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 183X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t under Section 71A. Filing of returns by recipients of service was provided under Section 71A in 2003 and thereafter, in 2004, Section 73 was amended for recovery of duty from those persons who are required to file return whether under Section 70 or 71A. No such notice has been issued in the present case quoting the correct legal provisions. Therefore, the show cause notice issued in the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax Rules, 1994, (Rules in short) the liability to pay Service Tax was on the recipient of the service. Inasmuch as the appellant did not pay the Service Tax, a show cause notice dated 9-1-2001 was issued proposing to demand Service Tax of ₹ 10,156/- under Rule 6 of the Rules read with Section 11 of Central Excise Act, 1944. The demand was confirmed vide order dated 5-5-2004 and appeal agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of persons who are required to file return under Section 71A. In the present case, since the notice has been issued in 2001 invoking the powers under Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the demands are unsustainable. He also relies on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd., reported 2005 (187) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.) = 2006 (3) S.T.R. 715 (S.C.), wherein the Hon b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... As held by the Hon ble Apex Court, the demands under Section 73 towards short levy/non-levy of the Service Tax could have been made only in respect of service providers who were required to file returns under Section 70 and not under Section 71A. Filing of returns by recipients of service was provided under Section 71A in 2003 and thereafter, in 2004, Section 73 was amended for recovery of duty fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
