9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S/Shri Joseph Vellapally, Sr. Advocate and Thomas Vellapally, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri T.C. Raja Dass, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - In terms of the impugned order, the appellant is required to pre-deposit the following amounts : (i) An amount of Rs. 54,64,578/- towards Service Tax and Rs. 74,156/- towards Education Cess in respect of Cargo Handling Services for the period from 16-8-2002 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 per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken only transportation of the goods in their barges. Therefore, they had not rendered any "Cargo Handling Services". In fact M/s. SICL had sub-contracted the transportation of the goods for CBZL to the appellants and they had remitted Service Tax for the services provided to CBZL. SICL had duly filed returns and paid Service Tax for the services rendered to CBZL, which was within the knowledge of the department. Despite this, Service Tax has again been 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 thes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mer Agent Services" as wrongly held in the impugned order. At the most, the appellant was only liable to be assessed under the heading of "Business Auxiliary Services" for which the appellant had duly taken out registration and remitted tax after the introduction of the Service Tax on "Business Auxiliary Services". In any event, the invoices raised by the steamer agents on the appellant already included the applicable Service Tax which was duly remitted and 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 Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, they had got themselves registered when the said services came under the taxable head. Therefore, for any period prior to that it was urged that they could not be taxed under "Steamer Agent Services". In our view, prima facie, the appellants have a strong case on merits. Mere transportation of materials cannot come under the category of "Cargo Handling Services". It was also pointed out that the "Steamer Agents" who have billed the appellants had already included the Service Tax in their bills. Therefore, there is no question of payment of Service Tax again as it would amount to double taxation. In view of these factors, Revenue's case appears to be weak. Hence, we are inclined to order complete waiver of Service Tax, penalties and inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
