2015 (7) TMI 1138

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y this Court, it is not necessary to frame any question of law for consideration. 2. The facts, in a nutshell, are as hereunder :- The appellant, a partnership firm, was the successful bidder in the tender process conducted by the Steel Authority of India. The appellant was awarded the tender for handling of iron and steel materials. The appellant, was under the bona fide belief that the nature of work did not involve cargo handling services within the meaning of the Finance Act, 1994 and, therefore, had not obtained any registration certificate in terms of the said Act. 3. The appellant was issued a show cause notice dated 20-7-2006, on the basis of intelligence, alleging that the appellant was rendering cargo handling service .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by limitation and, therefore, the appeal has to be allowed and the entire demand in terms of proviso to Section 73(1) of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 has to be set aside. 6. Per contra, learned standing counsel appearing for the department submitted that the authorities below have concurrently held that the services rendered by the appellant related to cargo handling, which squarely falls under Section 65(23) of Chapter V of the Finance Act. Further, it is submitted that the assessee has not submitted any proof to show that the services rendered by the assessee were not related to cargo handling services. It is further submitted that the contention of the assessee that the entire proceedings is barred by limitation has to be rej .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng the case, we do not find any justification to entertain the appeal on the plea that merely because the original order has not invoked the provisions for imposing the penalty, automatically the plea of no tax invoking proviso to Section 73(1) would apply. This plea of the appellant appears to be on a wrong premise, as we find from the order of the Tribunal that what has been agitated is the fact that the nature of services provided by the assessee does not fall within the service tax net, which the original authority, the appellate authority as also the Tribunal, have concurrently held against the appellant holding that the activity performed by the appellant would fall squarely within the provisions of Section 65(23) of Chapter V of Fina .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X