9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1097X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he office of DGCEI and no show cause notice under the said head was issued by the office of DGCEI to the appellant. In this background, issuance of show cause notice on 10.04.2013 demanding service tax on this very amount of user development fee is clearly barred by limitation. There was no suppression or intention to evade payment of duty as the appellant had clearly disclosed the fact regarding collection of said user development fee as well as their views about non-taxability of the same to the department way back in 29.12.2009. Similar view has been held by Tribunal in the appellant s own case PORT OFFICER, GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD, JAFRABAD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, BHAVNAGAR [ 2014 (7) TMI 972 - CESTA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Electricity Charges (Plot rent) Demands were raised against them to recover service tax on all this charges however, the demand was confirmed only in respect of recoveries made against plot development charges only. 2.1 Learned counsel pointed out that earlier a show cause notice was issued to them in respect of same set of plots allotted to ship breakers demanding service tax under renting of immovable property service. He pointed out that the earlier demand was also in respect of same period. He pointed out that said earlier demand was raised only in respect of the amounts collected under the head of rent collected from the ship breakers. He pointed out in total six show cause notices were issued and all of them were dropped by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... informed about the said fee to the officers of DGCEI in 2009 but the officers in 2013 have chosen to issue show cause notice invoking extended period of limitation in 2013. He argued that entire demand is barred by limitation as full disclosure was made by them to the Revenue vide their letter dated 29.12.2009, before issue of first set of notices for the same period and for same set of transactions. 2.3 Learned counsel further pointed out that definition of Port Service reads as follows: Port Service means any service rendered by a port or other port or any person authorized by such port or other port, in any manner, in relation to a vessel or goods; Learned counsel argued that user development fee is in the nature of levy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e pointed out that the appellant assist the ship breakers in bringing the vessels for breaking into the shipyard. 3. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that two proceedings have been initiated against the appellant covering the same period and in respect of same set of receipts. The appellants have received amounts under the following heads from the ship breakers. Land lease Rental Plot Developmental Charges Plot Rent Plot Rent Shipping Breaking Shore Assistant Charges Water Electricity Charges (Plot rent) One set of six show cause notices were issued demanding service tax under the head of renting of immovable property service . The show cause notices were initiated af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llection made under the head of user development fee is not in respect of any service and the said amount collected by them is not liable to payment of service tax. Their views were clearly communicated to the office of DGCEI and no show cause notice under the said head was issued by the office of DGCEI to the appellant. In this background, issuance of show cause notice on 10.04.2013 demanding service tax on this very amount of user development fee is clearly barred by limitation. There was no suppression or intention to evade payment of duty as the appellant had clearly disclosed the fact regarding collection of said user development fee as well as their views about non-taxability of the same to the department way back in 29.12.2009. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
