9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utory provisions. The appellant also pays service tax under reverse charge mechanism in respect of the taxable services viz. GTA, MRA, Security, Rent-a-Cab, Advocate Services etc., as a recipient of such services. During the course of audit of financial accounts by the Audit Wing of the department, it was observed that the appellant had not paid service tax in terms of Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 on facilities fees, arrangement fees and legal expenses provided to the appellant by persons located in the non-taxable territory. Such fees were charged by the service provider for availment of the External Commercial Borrowings (ECB) loan to the appellant. Pursuant to the audit objection raised by the department, the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... referred to 3rd Member on reference for answering the disputed issue. Thus, he contended that in absence of clarity with regard to levy and payment of service tax, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked for confirmation of the adjudged demand. In this context, the learned Advocate has relied on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Continental Foundation Jt. Venture v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh - 2007 (216) ELT 177 (S.C.) and the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Jorden Electronics vs. Commissioner of Customs - 2016 (333) ELT 412 (Tri. - Del) and J.P.P. Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem - 2016 (46) STR 317 (Tri. Che). 4. On the other hand, learned D.R. appeari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt Revenue. In this case, since the period of dispute is from April 2011 to March 2012 and the show-cause notice was issued on 07.01.2016, I am of the considered view that the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked for confirmation of the adjudged demand and the same should only be confined to the normal period. I find that the judgments relied upon by the learned Advocate for the appellant are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. It has specifically been ruled that when there was difference of opinion regarding includability of certain fees in the assessable value, necessitating reference of the dispute to a 3rd Member, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. 7. In view of above, the impugned order c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
