9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bout non-payment of Service Tax on GTA and business auxiliary service. It is found that suppression of fact with intention to evade payment of tax does not exist in this case. The appellant has categorically informed the Department about the non-payment of Service Tax vide letter dated 26.10.2007. On receipt of the letter, no action has been taken by the Department. In such circumstances, the demand of Service Tax by invoking the extended period of limitation is not sustainable. In the present case, the demand notice for the period from 2007-08 to 2010-2011 has been issued vide the Show Cause Notice dated 15.10.2012. Thus, the entire demand confirmed in the impugned order is barred by limitation of time. Accordingly, the demand confirmed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He also imposed a penalty of Rs.10,000/- under Section 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994. 3. Aggrieved against the said order, the appellant has filed this appeal. 4. Regarding the demand of Service Tax under the category of business auxiliary service , the appellant submits that Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. dated 20.06.2003 specifically exempts business auxiliary services provided by a commission agent in relation to sale or purchase of agricultural produce from Service Tax leviable thereon under Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994, but the Department has disallowed the same on the ground that the said Notification is restricted to agricultural produce only i.e., in the instant case, the appellant exported other goods also in addition to raw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have submitted nil return for the said period and intimated the Department vide letter dated 26.10.2007. They have also intimated the Department that they had applied for refund of Service Tax paid for the financial years 2005-06 and 2006-07. It is also submitted that they have not paid Service Tax for the period from April 2007 to September 2007 on the bona fide belief that the Service Tax was not payable by them; the Department has not acted upon the letter dated 26.10.2007 wherein the intimation was given by them to the Department that they were not paying Service Tax on the above said services. The appellant submits that for the period 2009-10 to 2010-11 also, they filed returns wherein they have clearly mentioned that they have availe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ey were also purchasing raw cotton and various handicraft and miscellaneous items and selling it in the domestic as well as foreign market. We observe that during the period 2005-06 and 2006-07, the appellant has paid Service Tax and claimed refund. However, from April 2007 onwards, they stopped paying Service Tax and filed nil return. In the nil return so filed by them, they have categorically informed that they were rendering the service of GTA and not paying Service Tax on the same. They also intimated the Department about the non-payment of Service Tax vide their letter dated 26.10.2007. For ready reference, scanned copy of the said letter is reproduced below: - 7.1. We observe that no action has been initiated by the Department on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
