Tribunal overturns service tax confirmation and penalties, ruling in favor of appellant. Lack of legal basis cited.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the service tax confirmation and penalties imposed, finding in favor of the appellant. The impugned order confirming a service tax liability and penalties was set aside as the Tribunal deemed the appellant's arguments valid. It was observed that the show cause notice did not invoke the relevant provision of the Finance Act, indicating a lack of legal basis for demanding the service tax collected. Consequently, the appellant was granted consequential relief in line with the law, leading to a successful outcome for the appellant.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against service tax confirmation and penalties imposed under Section 73 of Finance Act, 1994.

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in printing, sale of computers, and forwarding advertisements to newspapers, was alleged to have mis-declared taxable consideration, leading to a demand for differential duty. The show cause notice issued in 2013 was contested, resulting in the impugned Order-in-Original dated 13.01.2015 confirming a service tax liability of Rs. 57,03,101/- along with penalties. The appellant challenged this order before the Tribunal.

The appellant's counsel argued that the income sources certified by a Chartered Accountant did not fall under taxable services, as printing and sale of computers were not covered by service tax. Additionally, the commission received from newspapers for forwarding advertisements was not considered a commission on sale of goods, thus not falling under Business Auxiliary Service. The counsel contended that printing of flex did not meet the criteria for service tax on advertisement services. Moreover, the appellant was alleged to have collected service tax from customers, but it was argued that customers did not pay service tax as they believed the activity was not taxable.

The Tribunal noted the appellant's submissions to be valid and set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal. It was observed that there was no invocation of Section 73A of the Finance Act, 1994 in the show cause notice, indicating that the collected service tax, even if recovered, could not be demanded without proper legal basis. The appellant was granted consequential relief in accordance with the law.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision favored the appellant, emphasizing that the contentions raised by the appellant's counsel were sustainable. The appeal was allowed, and the appellant was entitled to appropriate relief as per the law.

---