9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce. It is also apparent that there is error in computing the tax, as certain services on which tax has already been paid, have also been included, relating to inflation of the impugned demand - appeal of the appellant-assessee is allowed by way of remand to the adjudicating authority, with a direction to hear the appellant with respect to the three services namely GTA Service, Manpower Supply Agency Service, slaughtering charges and to determine the tax liability in accordance with law. Extended period of limitation - Held that:- The same is invocable, as admittedly the appellant failed to disclose service tax payable under the head of ‘Manpower Supply Agency Service’ and also renting of ‘Immovable Property Service’ - extended period invoked. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - APPEAL Nos. ST/71002/2016 & 52643/2015-ST[SM] - A/70934-70935/2018-SM[BR] - Dated:- 19-12-2017 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Shubham Agrawal, Advocate for Assessee Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh, Deputy Commissioner (AR), Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, Assistant Commissioner (AR) Shri Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Supdt (AR) for Revenue ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary These cros ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titled to benefit of exemption under Notification No.31/2012 ST and therefore, they were required to pay service tax on GTA services, i.e. on 25% of the whole amount paid towards the transportation charges and freight and cartages for exporting the packed frozen buffalo meat. Further, it appeared that no service tax is paid upon verification from ACES. 3. Further, as per Notification No.30/2012 ST w.e.f. 01/07/2012 it provided that a body corporate is required to pay service tax on reverse charge mechanism on the supply of manpower service on 75% of due service tax. Being a private limited company, the assessee was required to pay service tax. Further, on verification, it appeared that no service tax was paid under reverse charge mechanism, on the supply of manpower service. During examination of balance sheet, it was observed that assessee have paid several charges to the outside labours doing work, such as Labour Charges, Butcher Expenses, Slaughtering Charges and Factory Cleaning charges, during the period from 1 st July, 2012 to 30 th November, 2013. 4. It was further appeared to revenue from examination of balance sheet that appellant-assessee have received rent duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t covers a period of 2009 10 to 2012 13 and 2013 14 (up to November, 2013). Further, on perusal of the SCN it was seen that it is issued for the period 2009 10 to 2012 13, that is the period also covered in the VCES declaration. However, the SCN covered the period beyond 31/12/2012 till which date VCES scheme was applicable. Further, discussing the effect of VCES, 2013 it was observed that under Section 105(e) the scheme is applicable for the period from 1st October, 2007 to 31st December, 2012, only, whereas SCN covered the period from 01st April, 2009 to 31st March, 2013 and 01st April, 2013 to 30th November, 2013. Further, observing that for the period the VCES scheme of the party is completely covered under the period mentioned in the SCN. Further, in the VCES application, the appellant have declared the tax dues for GTA service and Legal Consultancy Services only, whereas SCN covers GTA Services, Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Service and Renting of Immovable Property Services. Further, he observed that the issue of VCES application has precedence only for GTA services vis-a-vis the alleged demand proposed in the SCN. Therefore, covering the period 2009-10 to 2012 13 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellant-assessee have paid service tax and service tax was charged by the service providers on such other services, including the service tax on GTA service. As such the matter needs to be remanded, on this ground for reworking out the liability, in accordance with law. So far the Manpower Recruitment Service is concerned the learned counsel states that no labour charges/Butcher charges was shown in the balance-sheet. The learned counsel states that the allegation is erroneous and no such charges have been shown on either side of the profit and loss account in the nature of butcher charges or labour charges. Slaughtering charges are the income of appellant, wrongly included in the show cause notice. However, appellant admits the liability with respect to factory cleaning charges, but states that the computation is erroneous, as the same amount have been added twice, including freight demand. So far as the extended period of limitation is concerned, learned counsel states that so far as GTA service is concerned the situation, is revenue neutral, as the appellant being exporter is entitled to refund of service tax paid in the course of services availed for export. Further, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
