9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S/Shri V. Sridharan and V. Panchanathan, Advocates, for the Appellant, Shri J. P. Gregory, JCDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - After examining the records, we find that tile appellants are air cargo agents of various airlines and are also a member of tile IATA. In the impugned order, ld. Commissioner confirmed demand of service tax of Rs. 93,11,332/- along with Education Cess against them for the period 1-4-2003 to 31-3-2006 and imposed on them penalties under Sections 76 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 totalling to over Rs. 1.5 crores. The Service tax demand is in the category of Business Auxiliary Service under Section 65 (19) of the said Act. Business Auxiliary Service (BAS, for short) was introduce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umstances of this case, It is submitted that, on the subject of taxability of the aforesaid commission, there was a spate of correspondence between appellants and the department and that the department was in the know of all tile relevant facts and cannot allege suppression against them. In this context, ld. Counsel has also referred to para 15.9 of the impugned order, wherein the adjudicating authority relied on an order dt.13-12-05 of the Director-General of Service Tax (DGST). Ld. Commissioner observed that tile order of tile DGST was duly communicated to the Air Cargo Agents Association and that their liability to pay service tax in the category of BAS, on commission received from airlines was clearly known to them through DGST's order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service tax return by the assessee for the period prior to 10-9-04. Considering all these facts into account, we are inclined to hold, for the present purpose, that at least a part of the demand of service tax for the larger period of limitation is not hit by limitation. The SCN was issued in June, 2007 for demanding service tax and other dues for the period up to 31-3-2006. In any case, the appellants cannot prima facie resist the demand of service tax for the normal period. In the circumstances, we direct them to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees twenty lakhs only) for the purpose of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act as applicable to service tax matters. There being no plea of financial hardships in the present applicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
