9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1064X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther, the appellant has been reflecting the payment of commission in their balance sheet in which case, it can be held that there was no suppression or mis-statement on the part of the assessee so as to avoid the service tax payment with a mala fide intention - longer period of limitation is not available to the Revenue. For quantification of demand falling within the normal period of limitatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od 2006-2007 to 2008-2009. The Show Cause Notice stands issued on 1.09.2010. 2. Ld. advocate appearing for the appellant submits that prior to 17.04.2006, when Section 66A was introduced in the Finance Act, 1994, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of National Ship Owners Association Vs. Union of India [2008-TIOL-633-BOM] has held that no service tax liability would fall upon the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r was withdrawn by a subsequent Circular No.97/04/2007-ST, dated 10.05.2007, further clarifying that the services can be taxed in view of the Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 with effect from 18.04.2006 and Import of Service Rules introduced with effect from 19.04.2006. As such, learned advocate submits that since the circular was withdrawn only on 10.05.2007, they continued to entertain the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wise also, we note that the fact that the service tax on reverse charge was recently introduced and its scope was not clear and entertained various doubts, requiring issuance of various clarifications by the Board. In the facts and circumstances of the case that the services were provided outside India and tax liability fell on the appellant on reverse charge basis, a bona fide belief entertai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cordingly demand beyond the period of limitation is set aside with confirmation of demand falling within the limitation period. Accordingly, we remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for quantification of demand falling within the normal period of limitation. As we have already held that there is no suppression or mala fide intention on the part of the appellant, the penalty impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
