9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1028X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the appellants to any particular entity appears to have been made. It is not open for the Department to allege evasion of service tax on this count. The onus to prove the nexus between consideration and the service is on the Department who have made the allegations and issued the Show Cause Notice. Moreover, it is not open for the Revenue to invoke extended period under such circumstances. When no positive act, with intent to evade payment of duty, on the part of the appellant has been shown, has been evidenced. It has been held in a catena of judgments that under such circumstances, extended period cannot be invoked. By following the ratio of such decision, the Revenue has not made out any case for invocation of extended period. More ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other operating income; the Show Cause Notice was adjudicated by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Tax, Gurugram vide Order dated 25.03.2022 confirming the demand proposed in the Show Cause Notice along with equal penalty; Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order dated 11.01.2023 upheld the demand of Rs.9,71,695/- and confirmed the impugned order and partly remanded the matter to the lower authority on the issue of availability of exemption on service provided to SEZ developer and service tax on other operating income. Hence, this appeal. 2. Shri R. S Sharma, assisted by Shri Vivek Kumar, learned Counsels for the appellant, submits that there are four issues involved in the case (i) whether the SCN is time-barred? (ii) whether the deman ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ey Co Ltd (supra);therefore, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. He also relies on the following cases: Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Final Order No.55363/2024 dated 19.03.2024. M/s TVS Motors India Pvt. Ltd. Final Order No. 70112/2022 dated 17.06.2022 (CESTAT Allahabad) M/s GD Goenka Pvt. Ltd. Final Order No.51088/2023 dated 21.08.2023. Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Company 1995 (78) ELT 401 (SC). M/s Chemphar Drugs and Liniments, Hyderabad- (1989) 2 SCC 127. Cosmic Dye Chemical 1995 (75) ELT 721 (SC). H.M.M. Ltd. 1995 (76) ELT 497 (SC). Uniworth Textiles Ltd. 2013 (288) ELT 161 (SC). Easland Combines, Coimbatore (2003) 3 SCC 410 (SC) Gammon India Ltd. 2002 (146) ELT 173. 4. Learned Counsel submits, as regards the issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... records of the case. I find that the case is made by the Department on the ground that there is discrepancy between the figures reflected in balance sheets etc. and the service tax Returns. No effort to co-relate the income/ receipt shown in the balance sheet to any particular service rendered by the appellants to any particular entity appears to have been made. It is not open for the Department to allege evasion of service tax on this count. The onus to prove the nexus between consideration and the service is on the Department who have made the allegations and issued the Show Cause Notice. Moreover, it is not open for the Revenue to invoke extended period under such circumstances. When no positive act, with intent to evade payment of duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
