9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 562X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the Revenue, the Appellant was not even put to proper notice towards the allegations wherein an amount of over Rs.4.65 Crores was demanded - there are force in the Appellant s submission that they had bonafide belief that no Service Tax is payable. Admittedly, there is no evidence brought in by the Revenue that they were charging Service Tax on their clients. All these factual details clarify that the Department has not brought in any evidence to the effect that the extended period can be invoked. Accordingly, the confirmed demand for the extended period is required to be set aside on account of limitation itself. Therefore, the Impugned Order is set aside on account of limitation. Exemption under Entry No. 47(i) - HELD THAT:- There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lance turnover is fully exempt from Service Tax. He also upheld their submissions with regard to reconciliation of ITR vis- -vis ST3 Returns. Finally, he has confirmed Service Tax of Rs.79,84,647/- in respect of sound and light entry tickets, wherein, the total turnover is for Rs.5,31,38,829/-. Being aggrieved, the Appellant is before the Tribunal. 2. Learned Chartered Accountant appearing on behalf of the Appellant, submits that the Appellant is providing services, which are covered under exemption as per Entry No. 47(i) of the Exemption Notification No. 25/2012 dt.20.06.2012. He further submits that though the SCN was given in a bland way by quantifying the demand based on the ST3 Return vis- -vis ITR, still the Appellant has made all the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ajor demand of around Rs.3.85 Crores. Only where the Appellants were not in a position to provide any documentary evidence towards sound and light music show entry tickets, noting that no specific exemption was available to such services, the Adjudicating Authority has confirmed the demand. He further submits that the Appellants have not reflected the exempted turnovers in their ST3 Returns. Therefore, this would amount to non-disclosure of all the facts in the ST3 Returns. Hence, he justifies the invocation of the extended period. Hence, he justifies the confirmed demand and prays that the present Appeal may be dismissed. 5. Heard both sides and perused Appeal papers and all the documents placed before us. 6. We first take up the matter of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find force in the Appellant s argument that the services provided form part of exemption under Entry No. 47(i), which are : (i) exhibition of cinematographic film, circus, dance, or theatrical performance including drama or ballet. 8. Apart from this, we also find that there is an entry at S.No. 45 of the Notification No. 25/2012, where services by way of admission to a museum, national park, wildlife sanctuary, tiger reserve or zoo, etc., are fully exempt. The Appellant submits that the Borra Caves, wherein the services are being provided, are monitored by the Archaeological Survey of India. Therefore, there is a good chance that the Appellant would be eligible for exemption under either of these entries under Notification No. 25/2012-ST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
