9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 31-3-2006. (ii) An amount of Rs. 78,94,725/- towards Service Tax and Rs. 1,44,421/- towards Education Cess in respect of "Other Port Services" for the period from 1-7-2003 to 31-3-2006. (iii) An amount of Rs. 4,18,230/- towards Service Tax plus Rs. 8,220/- towards Education Cess for the period from 1-3-2003 to 20-11-2003 and from 3-3-2005 to 31-3-2006 for the services rendered as "Steamer Agent" and on which the appellants had received foreign exchange. (iv) Penalty at the rate of Rs. 100/- per day under Section 76. (v) Penalty of Rs. 1000/- under Section 77. (vi) Penalty of Rs. 1,40,04,330/- under Section 78. (vii) Interest under Section 75 has been demanded (not quantified). 2. Shri Joseph Vellapally, Sr. Advocate and Shr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n illegally levied on the appellants and such levy amounts to double taxation. 3.1 As regards the transportation activities carried out for M/s. Alvares and Thomas and Deccan Minerals Pvt. Ltd. in the ports of Karwar and Redi as "Other Port Services", it was submitted that neither of these ports had authorized the appellants to provide any services in any manner as required under Section 65(82) of the Finance Act, 1994. The specific contention of the appellants that no such authorization has been granted by these ports has been totally ignored by the Adjudicating Authority. The barges owned by the appellants, which are operated in Karwar and Redi are only registered under the Cochin Canals and Ferries Act. The Adjudicating Authority has er ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d assessed by the department. The department cannot again charge Service Tax under the heading of "Steamer Agent Services" on the appellants and this would amount to double taxation and is impermissible in law. As tax is not liable to be paid, the imposition of penalties under various Sections is not justified. 4. The learned Departmental Representative took us through the impugned order and stated that even though the appellant had urged the point that they have been only carrying out the transportation of cargo in their barges, there are many clauses in the contract with M/s. FACT which referred to loading and unloading. These point have been examined by the Commissioner in Paras 19 and 20 of the impugned order. Similarly, he stated that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
