The CESTAT upheld the imposition of service tax on the appellant...

The CESTAT upheld the imposition of service tax on the appellant for fish exported without rearing or breeding, ruling that such fish do not qualify as agricultural produce under Section 66D(iii) and thus are not exempt from service tax. The tribunal held that services provided by the GTA for transporting such fish were taxable. Regarding sales commission paid to overseas agents in 2010-11 and 2013-14, the appellant was required to pay service tax upfront and could claim a refund limited to 1% of the FOB value under the relevant notifications. The appellant's failure to comply with procedural requirements constituted a violation of exemption notifications. The extended limitation period and penalty were justified due to suppression of facts and non-filing of returns, as revealed by third-party data. Consequently, the order imposing service tax, penalty, and invocation of extended limitation was affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.