2016 (9) TMI 742

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he respondent ORDER The Revenue appeal is directed against the order dated 25/02/2010. The dispute is regarding charging of service tax on the assessee under the category of Business Auxiliary Services. The assessee acted as an intermediary between the two working companies in connection with the transfer of title of equipment and machineries. They received appropriate charges amounting to Rs. 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n that the assessee has acted as a commission agent and hence, the service rendered will be covered under the category of Business Auxiliary Services defined in Section 65 (19) of the Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, service tax will be liable on the amount of brokerage received by the assessee, We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the demand on account of time bar. 4. We note fro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ere has been no suppression of fact by the assessee. 5. We are inclined to uphold the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. Supreme Court in the case of Coaltar Chemicals Manufacturing Co. Vs. Union of India [2003 (158) E.L. T. 402 (SC) has held that for invoking the suppression clause for demand of duty under the time bar, there has to be something positive other than m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X