9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spite notice being served. As this is the third date fixed for Hearing, with the assistance of learned AR for Revenue, this Appeal is taken up for hearing and disposal. 2. The issue in this Appeal is whether the Appellant is entitled to SSI Exemption on the value of services rendered by them. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Appellants have entered into an agreement with M/s SITD Ltd, Hyderabad to provide Commercial Training or Coaching service on behalf of M/s SITD Ltd, Bangalore under a franchise agreement during the period April 2005 to March 2007. Acting on the information received, the departmental officers visited the appellant s premises on 08.07.2009 and recorded a statement from the Proprietor Mr. Md. M. Ansari on 07.07. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad preferred an Appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who was pleased to allow the Appeal in part, observing as follows: 13. In the present case, the first ST3 Return for the period ending 30.09.2005 has to be filed with the department on 25.10.2005. So, the Show Cause Notice was issued by the Adjudicating Authority on 12.10.2010 which is well in 5 years as envisaged under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994. So, the objection of the assessee that the Show Cause Notice was time barred and not applicable to the period 04/2005 to 09/2005 is not sustainable in law. Since the appellants have not registered with the department under Section 69 of the Finance Act, 1994 the Show Cause Notice can be issued invoking the extended period of 5 y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s.4,00,000/-, during the period under dispute, they were entitled to SSI Exemption. Accordingly, appellant had prayed for allowing the Appeal. 8. Learned AR for Revenue states that the grounds taken are not supported by the facts on record. Further, in the Notification No.06/2005-ST granting exemption to SSI, it has been provided in the very beginning of the notification that nothing contained in this notification shall apply to (i) taxable services provided by a person under a brand name or trade name, whether registered or not, of another person. This contention of the appellant has no legs to stand. Accordingly, prays for dismissing the Appeal. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances, we are satisfied that there is no reason for mis-i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
