Prima facie service tax exemption claim justified complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

At the stay stage, a prima facie case was found for complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery against the confirmed service tax demand. Notification No. 18/2009-ST was treated as substantially satisfied, and procedural lapses such as delayed returns and non-intimation did not, on the facts, defeat the substantive exemption claim. The demand on commission paid to overseas agents was also viewed as prima facie offset by available credit. Objections relating to Business Exhibition Service and Technical Inspection and Certification Service were accepted because the exhibitions were held abroad and no inspection or certification activity was shown. For GTA service, the burden remained on Revenue, and the record did not displace the claim that transport was by individual truck owners without consignment notes.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the confirmed service tax demand, having regard to the prima facie applicability of Notification No. 18/2009-ST and the nature of the demands under Business Auxiliary Service, Business Exhibition Service, Technical Inspection and Certification Service, and Goods Transport Agency Service.

Analysis: The appeal was at the stay stage, and the determination was confined to a prima facie assessment. The appellants had substantially satisfied the conditions for exemption under Notification No. 18/2009-ST, and the procedural defaults regarding delayed return and non-intimation did not, on the facts, outweigh the substantive exemption claim. The demand relating to commission paid to overseas agents was also supported by the observation that equivalent credit would prima facie be available. The objections to Business Exhibition Service and Technical Inspection and Certification Service were accepted at the prima facie stage because the exhibitions were held abroad and no inspection or certification activity was shown to have occurred. As to GTA service, the burden to establish taxability was held to lie on Revenue, and the record did not displace the appellants' contention that transport was undertaken by individual truck owners without consignment notes.

Conclusion: The appellants were held entitled to complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery during the pendency of the appeal.

---