9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here is no good reason as to why the certificate issued by a Chartered Accountant should not have been taken into consideration and in any case if there was any doubt, the Principal Commissioner could have sought information from the appellant to satisfy himself about the claim of exemption made by the appellant, but that was not done. This inaction on the part of the appellant was required to be examined in the light of the Circular dated 11 June 2007 issued by the Central Board of Excise Customs. This Circular clearly mentioned that in small consignment it may not be possible to goods transport agency to provide the vehicle number and that in such a case this could be provided at a later stage. The Principal Commissioner, if he wante ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the amount of service tax leviable on the taxable value comes to ₹ 1,56,41,627/-. The appellant was, therefore, called upon to show cause as to why the service tax short paid should not be demanded and recovered with interest and penalty. 4. The appellant submitted a reply dated 13 January 2009 to the aforesaid show cause notice mentioning therein that the gross booking amount also included the exempted service on which the appellant was not required to either charge or deposit service tax in terms of the notification dated 3 December 2004 that granted exemption to the taxable service provided by goods and transport agency where the gross amount charged on an individual consignment transported in goods did not exceed ₹ 750/-. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l appearing for the appellant has submitted that the Principal Commissioner failed to examine the certificate filed by the appellant to demonstrate that the difference in the payment of service tax had arisen only on account of the exemption that was available to the appellant under the notification dated 3 December 2004 and which notification was not examined by the Principal Commissioner in its correct perspective. It is his submission that the certificate of the Chartered Accountant was not only submitted by the appellant in 2009 with the letter dated 16 March 2009, but also on 12 May 2015 during the course of hearing of the appeal before the Principal Commissioner. Learned Counsel also pointed out that even in the reply filed by the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly shows that the Chartered Accountant certificate submitted by the appellant to substantiate his claim regarding exemption under the notification dated 3 December 2004 has not been considered at all, even though in the earlier part of the order the Principal Commissioner has noted that the appellant had produced the said certificate during the course of hearing of the appeal on 12 May 2015. There is no good reason as to why the certificate issued by a Chartered Accountant should not have been taken into consideration and in any case if there was any doubt, the Principal Commissioner could have sought information from the appellant to satisfy himself about the claim of exemption made by the appellant, but that was not done. The Principal Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
