9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1411X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of service, as providing of taxable service was remain unearthed if searches premises of the appellant was not conducted by the department - extended period rightly invoked. Penalty u/s 80 - Held that: - full service tax liability with interest has been paid before issue of demand notice - penalty waived by invoking section 80. Appeal allowed in part. - Service Tax Appeals No.57241, 57659 of 2013 - A/50356-50357/2018-CU[DB] - Dated:- 19-1-2018 - Shri Dr. Satish Chandra, President And Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Ms. Rinki Arora, Advocate for the appellant. Shri P. Juneja, Authorized Representative (DR) for the Respondent. ORDER Per. (Dr.) Satish Chandra The appellant filed these appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The impugned order observed as below :- 14. As regards, leviability of service tax on the services provided by the appellant, I find from the case cited by the appellant that a Cab operator who provides a cab with driver for going from one place to another on per kilometer basis or on lumpsum amount based on distance is providing transport service, control of vehicle remained with cab operator/driver as such this service is outside the purview of Rent-a-cab Operator service. It is also held in said judgments that Rent-a-Cab Schemed, 1989 framed by Central Government under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides that this scheme involves giving the cabs on rent to a client and during period of renting, the vehicle is at the disposal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and chargeable to service tax under Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 . 5. We are in agreement with the finding recorded above. Regarding the limitation, it is the submission of the learned Counsel that demand is time barred as there were different interpretations. From the order-in-original, it appears this issue was examined and the following observations were recorded :- 16. Further, regarding their plea of limitation I find that the appellant had not disclosed the value of remunerated amount that they are not discharging/paying service tax on the remunerated amount to the department despite clear provisions of law on the issue, it is proved beyond any doubt that they had suppressed this fact from the department, with intent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
