9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n brief, facts of the case are that appellant at their factory at Bangalore are engaged in manufacture and sale of Industrial and Medical gases viz. oxygen, argon and nitrogen as well as medical gases. The appellant engaged the service of goods transport operator for purpose of receiving inputs for the manufacture of these gases and also for supply the manufactured gases to customer. The Govt. of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st under Section 75 of the Finance Act. The Dy. Commissioner demanded the amount of Rs. 1,19,563.00 towards the Service tax payable and confirmed the demand of Rs. 78,391.00 being the interest for the period up to 23rd August, 01 @ 1.5% per every month up to 15th July, 2001 and 24% per annum w.e.f. 16th July, 2001. The Commissioner of Appeals rejected the appeal. Hence this appeal has been filed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in 1999 (112) E.L.T. 365 (S.C.) = 1999 (33) RLT 911 (SC) struck down the levy of service tax and declared it ultra vires. Subsequently, Govt. reintroduced the levy with retrospective effect for the period 16-11-97 to 1st June, 98 in the Finance Act, 2000 which received the assent of the President in May, 2000. From above it is clear that service tax was not applicable for the period from 16-11-97 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant would have been that they should have paid the tax, followed the procedure and claim refund like others". The levy of tax was not in force from 16-11-97 to 1-6-98. It is futile or a farce fallacy to deposit a tax and get it refunded. From above discussion it is clear that appellant was under obligation to discharge the Tax liability from 16-11-97 to 1st June, 98 only on May, 2000 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
