9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by which the appeal has been partially allowed to the extent that the demand with the statutory interest for the period 01.04.2012 to 30.06.2012 has been confirmed but the demand for the period after 01.07.2012 has been dropped. 2. The appellant was established by the Rajasthan State Government under the provisions of The Rajasthan Agriculture Produce Markets Act, 1961. To fulfill the obligations of providing necessary facilities of marketing of agricultural produce cast upon the appellant, the appellant let out shops or godowns within the market area and collected an allotment fee from the merchants or agriculturalists. 3. It is the collection of this amount that led to the issuance of a show cause notice dated 08.05.2014. The show caus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Circle, Jaipur-302005 (Rajasthan) within 30 days from the receipt of this show cause notice as to why:- (i) Service Tax amounting Rs. 10,21,829/- (Service tax Rs. 9,92,067/- + Education Cess Rs. 19,841 + SHE Cess Rs. 9,921/-) should not be demanded and recovered from them under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994; (ii) Interest at the appropriate rate should not be recovered from them under Section 75 of the Act ibid; and (iii) Penalty should not be imposed upon the provision of Section, 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 for contravention of Section 68, 69 & 70 of the Finance Act of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Rule 4, 6 & 7 of the Service Tax, 1994. 4. The appellant filed a reply, denying the allegations made in the show ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom imposing any penalty on the appellant as the issue was of interpretation of benefit of a notification and tribunal in has its order dated 25.02.2017 already held that there was no malafide Act on part of the appellant to evade Service Tax. 9. In view of above, I partially allow the appeal filed by the appellant to the extent mentioned above and confirm the demand along with statutory interest for the period 1.4.2012 to 30.6.2012. Held accordingly. 6. Ms. Bhanu Shree Jain learned counsel appearing for the appellant made following submissions: i. The normal period of limitation for the rising demand for non-payment of service tax as per section 73 of the Finance Act for the period 01.04.2012 to 28.05.2012 is one year from the relevan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the service tax which has not been levied or paid or which has been short-levied or short-paid or the person to whom such tax refund has erroneously been made, requiring him to show cause why he should not pay the amount specified in the notice: Provided that where any service tax has not been levied or paid or has been short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded by reason of - (a) fraud; or (b) collusion; or (c) wilful mis-statement; or (d) suppression of facts; or (e) contravention of any of the provisions of this Chapter or of the rules made thereunder with intent to evade payment of service tax, by the person chargeable with the service tax or his agent, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect, as if, fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
