9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1493X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espective state governments. A perusal of the agreements executed by the appellant with the respective state governments clearly reveal that the appellant operated the Aerial Ropeway by charging value of tickets from the riders of the ropeway. They paid yearly license fee at specific rate to the respective governments of Sikkim and Jharkhand. Rest of the money earned is appropriated by them for operation and maintenance of the said Ropeway - the appellant has rendered the service of transportation of passengers by Rope Way, which has been specifically exempted from payment of service tax. The activities undertaken by the Appellant by way of transportation of passengers by ropeway was not taxable under any of the category under the positive list and was exempted under Serial No. 23(c) of N/N. 25/2012 ST dated 20.06.2012, under the negative list regime - the demands of service tax confirmed on this count are not sustainable. Activity of maintenance of the battery-operated vehicle and existing road train and prevailing track in the Science City Authority - HELD THAT:- The appellant was entrusted with the task to collect money from the visitors by selling tickets and giving a part of i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntenance repair of the Bridge at Jaleswar - HELD THAT:- It is observed that the said service related to maintenance of bridges and thus are exempted from payment of service tax. Accordingly, the demand confirmed on this count is set aside. Denial of CENVAT Credit utilized for discharging the Service Tax Liability - non-payment of service tax on advances - Reversal of CENVAT on account of non-payment to supplier/contractor - HELD THAT:- It is observed that the appellant has not produced the relevant documents earlier. Now, they claim that they have the documents with them readily and if the issue is remanded back to the adjudicating authority, they will be able to explain the issue. Accordingly, these issues are remanded back to the adjudicating authority for the purpose of verification of the documents and pass an appropriate order regarding eligibility of the credit. Appeals disposed off. - SHRI ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND SHRI K. ANPAZHAKAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Ajay Sanwaria, Advocate for the Appellant Shri R.K. Agarwal, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER There are two appeals filed by M/s. Damodar Ropeways Infra Limited (hereinafter referred to as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... non-payment to supplier/contractor 16,67,815 2.2. Another Show cause Notice No. 70/2014 through C. No. V(15) 146/ST-Adjn/Commr/14/6506 dated 11.06.2014 was issued demanding service tax of Rs. 85,36,534/- for the period April 2012 to March 2013, as mentioned in the following table: Issue Particular Tax Demand I Demand of Service Tax on alleged operation and maintenance of the Ropeway from Deorali Bazar to Secretariat (Tashiling), at Gangtok provided to the Government of Sikkim 12,61,083 II Demand of Service Tax on alleged operation and maintenance of the Ropeway at Trikut Hill, Deoghar, provided to the Government of Jharkhand 16,84,673 III Demand of Service Tax on alleged operation and regular periodic repair and maintenance including preventive maintenance of the battery operated vehicle and existing road train and prevailing track by providing license fee to the Science City Authority 32,857 IV Demand of Service Tax on alleged operation and maintenance of external coal handling system consisting of 9.8 km long bi-cable Aerial Ropeway System at Heavy Water Plant (Manuguru) Khammam, Andhra Pradesh 54,12,061 V Demand of Service Tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism on Rent a cab, Secur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that as per the agreement, they have operated the Aerial Ropeway by charging value of tickets from the riders of the ropeway. It is their contention that they paid yearly license fee/royalty at specific rate to the Sikkim/Jharkhand Government; rest of the money earned is appropriated by them for operation and maintenance of the said Ropeway. 3.1. The Appellant submits that they were given a license to operate and maintain ropeway by the Government of Sikkim and Jharkhand against a license fee; the service provider was the Government of Sikkim and Jharkhand for providing the right to operate and maintain the ropeway for which a license fee was being paid to the said governments. They submit that the activities undertaken by them are transportation of passengers by ropeway which is not a taxable service; the same was not taxable under any of the category under the positive list and was exempted under Serial No. 23(c) of Notification No.25/2012 ST dated 20.06.2012, under the negative list regime. The appellant contends that the said exemption was removed vide Notification No. 9/2016-ST dated 01.03.2016 with effect from 01.04.2016 and therefore, prior to such date, there was no servi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anical systems, such as ropeway system, no service tax would be chargeable. 5.2. The appellant submitted that they started paying service tax since 01-07-2012 on the entire activity undertaken by them and have paid Rs. 42,95,835 [through Cash of Rs.36,36,634 CENVAT Credit of Rs.6,59,201] out of the total demand of Rs.54,12,061/-. 6. Regarding the demand of Service Tax of Rs.1,45,860/- under Reverse Charge Mechanism on Rent a cab, Security Service, Works Contract Service, Manpower Recruitment Service Legal Services, the appellant submits that they have already paid the total amount of Service Tax of Rs. 1,45,860/- along with interest of Rs. 44,853/-, towards their dues. The appellant submits that they have no intention to evade payment of tax and paid the service tax along with interest. Since the entire demand confirmed in the impugned order is paid along with interest, they submit that no penalty is imposable on them. 7. Regarding the demand of service Tax of Rs.12,97,057/- on the operation and maintenance repair of the Bridge at Jaleswar, the appellant submits that the said service related to maintenance of bridges is exempted from payment of service tax. 8.Regarding denial of CE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sitors in to the science city, which is not a taxable service. The said activity was not taxable under any of the category under the positive list and was exempted under Serial No. 23(c) of Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, under the negative list regime. Accordingly, we hold that the demands of service tax confirmed on this count in the both the orders is not sustainable. 14. Regarding the demand of Service Tax on the operation and maintenance of external coal handling system, we observe that the essence of the contract was transportation of 60,000 MT of coal in a month through the aerial ropeway system. Further, payment for coal transportation was made based on reading taken from the belt weighing scale. It is also submitted that the Department of Atomic Energy (GOI) in the contract awarded to the Appellant had provided that service tax is leviable only on maintenance activity (13.33% of the total operations) and balance is exempt from payment of service. We observe that the appellant has discharged Service tax liability on the Maintenance part from time to time for the entire period. We observe that the activities of the appellant relating to transportation of coal in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hey claim that they have the documents with them readily and if the issue is remanded back to the adjudicating authority, they will be able to explain the issue. Accordingly, we remand these issues back to the adjudicating authority for the purpose of verification of the documents and pass an appropriate order regarding eligibility of the credit. 18. In view of the above discussions, we pass the following order: (i) The activities undertaken by the Appellant by way of transportation of passengers by ropeway was not taxable under any of the category under the positive list and was exempted under Serial No. 23(c) of Notification No.25/2012 ST dated 20.06.2012, under the negative list regime. Accordingly, the demands of service tax confirmed on this count in the both the orders are set aside. (ii) The demand of Service Tax confirmed in the impugned orders on the activity of maintenance of the battery-operated vehicle and existing road train and prevailing track, is set aside. (iii) Regarding the demand of Service Tax on the operation and maintenance of external coal handling system, no service tax payable for the period prior to 01.07.2012. The issue is remanded back to the adjudicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
