9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 257X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... late filing of EXP-1 and EXP-2 forms/returns - an identical issue was considered by the Tribunal in the case of Coromandel Stampings & Stoned Ltd. vs. C.C.E. & S.T., Hyderabad-II [2016 (7) TMI 780 - CESTAT HYDERABAD]. It was observed that non filing of EXP-1 and EXP-2 as required under exemption N/N. 18/2009-ST is only a procedural lapse and will not result in denial of substantive benefit, otherwise available in terms of notification - demand set aside. Business Exhibition Services - Held that:- The same were admittedly held in Foreign Land and in terms of the Board’s Circular cannot be considered to be taxable in India. It is well settled that the authorities cannot act against the Board’s Circular. Otherwise also no service having be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to. - APPEAL No. ST/50519/2014-CU[DB] - FINAL ORDER NO 72684/2018 - Dated:- 27-11-2018 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri A.K. Prasad (Advocate) for Appellant Shri Mohd Altaf (Assistant Commissioner), AR for Respondent ORDER Per: Archana Wadhwa After hearing both the sides duly represented by Shri A.K. Prasad (Advocate) for the appellant and Shri Mohd Altaf, Assistant Commissioner, AR for the Revenue we find that the appellants are engaged in the Manufacture of Shoes classifiable under Chapter 64 of the Central Excise Tariff Act and Major production is being exported to various European Countries. 2. During the course of audit of the appellants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... viders based abroad. The only ground for denying the exemption is because of late filing of EXP-1 and EXP-2 Forms/Returns as required under the said notification. There is no allegation in the said show cause notice about non-observance of the other mandatory conditions of the said notification. It is established law that substantial benefit of a notification cannot be denied on account of procedural lapses or infractions. Hence, the demand of ₹ 1,62,45,544/- on this account is unsustainable. B. In any case the above amount even if paid by the appellants would be available to them as Cenvat Credit being service tax paid on input service . Hence, the whole exercise is Revenue neutral. C. In respect of demand of ₹ 4,4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the manufacturing process in India and use of labour in the factory. No inspection of certification was involved. E. As regards the demand of ₹ 30,10,103/- relating to GTA services availed by the appellants, the same is not sustainable as it was pointed out in the reply to the Audit as well as in the reply to the show cause notice that most of the transportation was done by individual truck owners themselves and not transport agency was involved. Wherever services of any transport agency were availed appropriate service tax had regularly been paid by the appellant during the impugned period. Relevant invoices containing the names of the individual truck owners were available with the appellants for verification by the Departm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t 2016 (43) S.T.R. 221 (Tri.- Hyd.). It was observed that non filing of EXP-1 and EXP-2 as required under exemption Notification No. 18/2009-ST is only a procedural lapse and will not result in denial of substantive benefit, otherwise available in terms of notification. To the same effect is another decision of the Tribunal in the case of Radiant Textiles Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh-II reported at 2017 (47) S.T.R. 195 (Tri.- Chan.). In view of foregoing we find no justifiable reasons to uphold the impugned demand. 6. As regards the Business Exhibition Services, we find that the same were admittedly held in Foreign Land and in terms of the Board s Circular cannot be considered to be taxable in India. It is well ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
