9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant is an Association of State Road Transport Undertaking (hereinafter referred to as ASRTU), they have their another division and known as Central Institute of Road Transport (CIRT) at Pune. Both the units are engaged in providing various services to its registered members. Proceedings were initiated against the appellant by way of issuing two show cause notices, which raised the demand of Service tax in respect of various services being provided by them and falling under different heads. The proceedings in the show cause notice culminated into impugned orders passed by the Commissioner confirming the demand of service tax to the tune of Rs. 9.66 crores. It is seen that during the adjudication before the Commissioner,the appellant took ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iliation sheet submitted by the noticee along with their reply dated 18.6.2012 is totally vague, incomplete and misleading in the said reconciliation sheet the noticee has inconspicuously claimed exemption from payment of service tax on account of export of services, but the assessee has not submitted any proof, whatsoever, in this regard in support of their claim regarding export of services. During the course of personal hearing held on 21.10.2013, the assessee had produced a letter dated 15.10.2013 issued by State Bank of India, Pune stating that the requisite report /verification in respect of deposit of Service Tax by CIRT Pune would be given in 10-15 days time, but I find that no such report has been produced by the noticee. I find th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the main ground that invoices produced by the assessee did not tally with the service tax paid by Pune, in the common balance sheet for the two. It also stand recorded by the adjudicating authority that in respect of ST 3 return and TR 6 challan, produced before him, there is no co-relation between two. We find the above observation of the Commissioner did not reflect upon the correct factual position. We fail to understand as to how the challans produced by the appellant would get reflected in the common balance sheet inasmuch as there is no provision in the balance sheet showing any payment of service tax on the basis of different categories or invoicewise etc. Similarly, the observations made by the adjudicating authority in respect of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at no fee is charged by the appellant from the member transport. If that be the case, we prima facie agree with the learned advocate that said activity may not get covered under the category of "Business Auxiliary service". We have not gone into the details of said legal issue and inasmuch as the matter is being remanded to the adjudicating authority, we leave open it for the adjudicating authority to re-decide the issue on merits. 7. We also find that small amount of tax to the extent of Rs. 12 lakh stand confirmed against the appellant under the category of club and association activity. The said issue is now decided by various High courts. Reference may be made to judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand in Ranchi Club Ltd vs. CCE [2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
