9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 783X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts of the present case. As the limitation prescribed for the matter is governed under section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994, therefore, the provisions of Finance Act, 1994 are applicable in the present case for limitation. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/60390/2020-Ex - FINAL ORDER No.60565/2021 - Dated:- 19-3-2021 - MR. ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Om Prakash, Advocate for the Appellants Shri Piyush Yadav, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order demanding service tax of ₹ 6,67,103/- for the period from 1.7.2012 to 31.3.2013 by way of show cause notice issued on 6.4.2018. 2. The facts of the case are that the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 73 of the Act. 5. The Commissioner, Central Excise Service Tax, Chandigarh reviewed the order-in-original under section 84 of the Act on the ground that the appellant had admitted the liability during the enquiries and, therefore, according to section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the demand was within time. Accordingly, the appeal was filed by the Department before the Commissioner, CGST (Appeals), Chandigarh. 6. The appellant filed cross objection to the appeal. It was argued and demonstrated before the Commissioner (Appeals) that the applicability of section 18 of the Limitation Act had not arisen out of the order-in-original and thus the review order was void. Further, it was submitted that the Limitation Act applies only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of section 73 of the Act relating to recovery of service tax. This does not mean admission about the liability which is subject to legal grounds during the adjudication, much less any property or right contemplated by the Limitation Act. The liability of service tax was covered only by the Act of1994 and not the Limitation Act and Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demand. Against the said order, the appellant is before me. 8. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the appellant was required to obtain service tax registration and file the return. He further submits that the show cause notice has been issued on 6.4.2018 was even beyond the period of five years provided under section 73 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
