2009 (6) TMI 439 - AT - Service Tax

Appellate Tribunal rules demand for service tax barred by limitation, citing Apex Court precedent.

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s ruling that a demand for service tax was barred by limitation. The Tribunal ... Limitation- Time Bar- the respondent are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods and utilizing the service of Goods Transport operators during the period 16.11.1997 to 01.06.1998. In the light of the decision of CCE v. Gujarat Carbon & Industries Ltd. 2008 -TMI - 30244 - SUPREME COURT, in which it was hold that during the period prior to 2003, section 73 applied only in case of assessee who came under the provision of section 71A, like the assessee herein, was not bought under the net of section 73 prior to 203, held that- the demand of interest and penalty imposed on the assessee is not sustainable. Uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal. Issues:- Validity of demand for service tax- Barred by limitation- Applicability of section 73 of the Finance Act- Imposition of penaltiesThe judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai addressed the issue of the validity of the demand for service tax, which was contested by the revenue. The Commissioner (Appeals) had ruled that the demand could not be sustained as it was barred by limitation. The respondents, engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods, had utilized the service of Goods Transport Operators during a specific period. The department issued a show-cause notice to cover the unpaid service tax, confirming a demand and imposing penalties. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) found that the notice was issued beyond the allowable time limit, leading to the appeal.The Tribunal considered the decision of the Apex Court in CCE v. Gujarat Carbon & Industries Ltd., which clarified the application of section 73 of the Finance Act before 2003. It was highlighted that section 73 applied only to assessees required to file returns under section 70, excluding those falling under section 71A. The Apex Court had set aside a show-cause notice invoking section 73 in a similar case, deeming it not maintainable. Applying this precedent, the Tribunal concluded that the demand for interest and penalties on the assessee was unsustainable as the notice in this case also invoked section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision and dismissed the appeal.In summary, the judgment emphasized the importance of adherence to statutory provisions and time limits in issuing show-cause notices for service tax demands. The Tribunal's decision was guided by the precedent set by the Apex Court regarding the applicability of section 73 of the Finance Act, ultimately leading to the rejection of the appeal and the affirmation of the Commissioner (Appeals)'s ruling that the demand for service tax was barred by limitation.