9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 457X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ining given to the appellant. From this work order, it is also clear that mining was carried out by someone else in the service recipient s mine and the appellant was awarded the job of only sizing of lime stones manually and supply thereof to their site therefore sizing of already mined lime stones does not fall under the activity of Mining Service and the major part is of transportation of the goods. Therefore, the entire activity does not qualify to categorize the same as mining service. Moreover, on the transportation, undisputedly the service recipient discharges the service tax under reverse charge mechanism. Time Limitation - suppression of facts or not - HELD THAT:- The appellant have made out a strong case on limitation inasmuch as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ally sized limestone which is post mining activity and the mining activity has not been carried out by the appellant and out of these activities the larger portion is of transportation therefore the service does not qualify as Mining Service. Accordingly, the service tax demanded is not sustainable. He further submits that as regards the transportation of lime stones for M/s. GHCL, the service tax has already been discharged by M/s. GHCL under reverse charge mechanism therefore, there cannot be double taxation on the same activity. He also submits that since on the same activity, the service recipient was discharging service tax under Goods Transport Agency service, the entire activity was well within the knowledge of the department therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the same as mining service. Moreover, on the transportation, undisputedly the service recipient discharges the service tax under reverse charge mechanism. For this reason also the demand under Mining Service cannot be sustained. 6. As regards the submission of the appellant on the limitation, we find that the appellant have made out a strong case on limitation inasmuch as on the same activity, the service tax was being discharged by M/s. GHCL and they were subject to audit from time to time therefore, the activity of the appellant for supply of manually sized lime stones to M/s. GHCL was not beyond the knowledge of the department. Therefore, suppression of fact cannot be alleged against the appellant. Hence, the demand is also liable to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
