2018 (2) TMI 570

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mmission received - Held that: - There is no material to establish that the appellant has suppressed facts and in fact during the relevant time the issue whether an independent distributor engaged in multilevel marketing is subject to levy of service tax was under much dispute - the demand for the extended period of limitation is unjustified and requires to be set aside - the matter is remanded to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s like the appellant are the persons who promote the sale of the product for which they receive sales incentive from M/s. Herbalife. The department was of the view that the appellant has not discharged the liability of service tax for the commission received and show cause notices were issued which after adjudication culminated in confirmation of demand, interest and also imposed penalties. In app .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t distributor of M/s. Herbalife was analyzed by the Tribunal vide final order cited supra and the Tribunal following the decision in the case of Charanjeet Singh Khanuja (supra) had held that the demand for the normal period would only be sustainable as there is no suppression or mis-statement with intent to evade payment of service tax. The penalties were also set aside. 6. On perusal of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X