2010 (2) TMI 640 - AT - Service Tax

Tribunal Waives Pre-Deposit & Suspends Recovery of Tax Liability

Afsar Tours & Travels Versus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Hyderabad

The Tribunal granted the appellant's request for waiver of pre-deposit and suspended the recovery of outstanding Service Tax liability, penalties, and ... Waiver of pre-deposit - rent-a-cab service - authorities proceeded on the ground that the entire income shown in the Balance Sheet has arisen out of renting of the cab – appellant is claiming that the income as shown in the Balance Sheet also includes income from other rent-a-cab operator - disputed amount paid by them during the pendency of the proceedings before the lower authorities - Application for waiver of pre-deposit of the balance amounts of Service Tax, penalties and interest allowed Issues:1. Stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax liability, penalty, and interest.2. Dispute regarding the income source shown in the Balance Sheet.3. Appellant's claim of income from other rent-a-cab operators.4. Evidence production responsibility on the appellant.5. Tribunal's decision on the waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.Analysis:The judgment pertains to a stay petition seeking the waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax liability, penalty under section 78, further penalty under section 77, and interest on the Service Tax amount. The appellant, engaged in rent-a-cab service, contested the Service Tax liability based on the composition of income in their Balance Sheet. The appellant argued that the income shown included revenue not solely from renting cabs to individuals but also from other rent-a-cab operators besides specific contracts with BSNL & BDL. The appellant had already deposited a substantial amount during the proceedings, which was considered by the Adjudicating Authority.The dispute revolved around the appellant's assertion that the income declared in the Balance Sheet encompassed earnings from other rent-a-cab operators, a claim not adequately proven before the lower authorities. The appellant assured the Tribunal of substantiating this claim subsequently. The Departmental Representative contended that the appellant failed to provide evidence supporting the diversified income sources. Despite the lack of conclusive evidence, the Tribunal acknowledged the disputed amount of Rs. 8,04,582 paid by the appellant during the proceedings as a substantial deposit. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the application for waiver of pre-deposit of the remaining Service Tax, penalties, and interest amounts, staying the recovery until the appeal's final disposal.In conclusion, the Tribunal granted the appellant's request for waiver of pre-deposit and suspended the recovery of the outstanding amounts, emphasizing the significance of the deposit made during the proceedings. The decision underscored the need for proper substantiation of income sources and the appellant's responsibility to provide evidence in tax liability disputes to support their claims effectively.