9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service is a taxable service liable to service tax in terms of provisions of Section 66B of the Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, vide Show Cause Notice No. 3152-54 dated 26.04.2018 service tax of Rs.7,11,574/- was proposed to be recovered along with the appropriate interest and the proportionate penalties. While adjudicating the said show cause notice the original adjudicating authority vide Order-in-Original No. 28 dated 30.04.2019 had dropped the demand of service tax on the total receipt of Rs.40,53,932/- during the said financial year. However, the demand on the remaining amount of Rs.17,03,136/- i.e. service tax amounting to Rs.2,10,508/- was confirmed. In an appeal against the said order Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order-in- Appeal No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The service provided by way of hiring the transport vehicle is exempted by Mega Notification No.25/2012 dated 20.06.2012. The invoice issued and the bilties received from the transporters were duly produced before the adjudicating authorities below giving all requisite details including the vehicle number, date and amount etc. Hence, the findings that no evidence was produced are not sustainable rather the documents sufficiently prove that the appellant duly qualified for the exemption of said mega notification. The appellant otherwise is entitled for SSI Exemption as per Notification No. 33/2012 dated 20.06.2012. Cum tax benefit eligibility has also been prayed in the light of invoices on record. Finally the demand is alleged to be barred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 05.2018 of the appellant, the adjudicating authority partially allowed the appeal in respect of Rs.40,53,932/- being the recipient of GTA services a Pvt. Ltd. Company & dropped the demand of Rs.5,01,066/-. For the remaining amount of Rs.17,03,136/-, the adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand of service tax amounting to Rs.2,10,508/- holding that the appellant has not submitted any document (evidence) showing that this amount also pertains to the above or has been received towards any other exempted service. Now, at the time of personal hearing the appellant has come up with some new facts that the vehicles owned by the appellant were also given on hire to various transporters (GTA) during the period. The transporters provided the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
