9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 333X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. The penalty under section 76 is set aside. Appeal allowed in part. - Service Tax Appeal No. 479 of 2009-DB - FINAL ORDER NO. A/ 11061/2019 - Dated:- 4-7-2019 - MEMBER (JUDICIAL), MR. RAMESH NAIR AND MEMBER (TECHNICAL), MR. RAJU Present For the Appellant : Shri Shailesh Vyas, Adv. Present For the Respondent : Shri S.N. Gohil, Supdt. (AR) ORDER This appeal has been filed by Shri Jaidev Barot against confirmation of demand of Service Tax, interest and imposition of penalty under section 76, 77 78 of the Finance Act. 2. Ld. Counsel for the appellant pointed out that the appellant is engaged in providing services to ONGC by supplying jeep taxies on monthly basis. The terms of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll liability of the taxies provided on hire remains with the appellant. Therefore, he argued that it cannot be said that the same were provided on rent to qualify as a rent a cab operator. Ld. Counsel pointed out that on merits they are not contesting the issue. However, they are contesting the issue on limitations. Ld. Counsel relied on the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Vijay Travels 2014 (36) STR 513 (Guj.). He pointed out that in the said case while the issue regarding the leviability to tax was against the assessee, benefit was granted by holding that the extended period of limitation is not applicable. Ld. Counsel also relied on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Maharashtra State Road Transport Corp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant was granted benefit of limitation while the demand on merit was upheld. In the said case, the SCN was issued on 20/10/2005 for the period 01/04/2000- 31/03/2001. Another SCN was issued on 31/08/2006 for the period 01/04/2001-31/03/2004. A third SCN was issued on 19/10/2007 for the period 01/04/2004-31/03/2007. In the proceedings in the said case of Vijay Travels were related to the second and third SCN in tax appeal no. 25/11 and 24/11. In the said case, the Hon ble High Court allowed the benefit of limitation on the following grounds: 22 . This brings us to the question Nos. V and VI which concern invoking of extended period of five years for levying service tax in case of the respondent. 23 . Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... registration and owning of minimum particular numbers of vehicles was a must and later on, amendments in the law were brought. 25.3 Merely because the petitioner got himself registered on 23-3-2004 and by way of abundant caution incorporated and accepted its liability in one of the terms of agreement, as and when arises, that ipso facto cannot be adjudged as his deliberate act of non-payment of tax alleging suppression and mala fide intention. It is a matter of record that the petitioner has been operating in the field from the year 1997. Every year by virtue of tender published by GSEB on the basis of yearly contract, it provides vehicles to the Board for the purpose of examining squad, for transfer of papers and for other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
