TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (8) TMI 565
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... being disposed of by a common order as the issue involved is identical in all the appeals. 2. As per facts on records, the appellants are providers of cellular telephone services which are covered by the definition under Section 65(74) of chapter V of Finance Act, 1994. The dispute in the present appeals relates to the issue is as to whether the value of SIM cards is required to be included in the value of services being provided by the appellants. 3. Both sides agree that the issue is no more res integra and stands settled by the recent decision in the same appellants' case reported as Idea Mobile Communications Ltd. v. C.C.E. & C, Cochin - 2011-TIOL-71-SC-ST= 2011 (23) S.T.R. 433 (S.C.). It stands held by the Apex Court t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Kerala High Court, learned Advocate submits that inasmuch the Tribunal's order was in favour of the assessee, there could be no question of mala fide on their part so as to invoke the longer period of limitation. He also draws our attention to various other decision of the Tribunal laying down that the value of SIM cards is not required to be included in the value of services. He places reliance on the Tribunal's decision in the case of RPG Cellular Services Ltd. v. C.C.E., Chennai - 2008 (10) S.T.R. 298 (Tri.) as also on the decision in the case of BPL Mobile Communication Ltd. v. C.C.E., Mumbai - 2007 (7) S.T.R. 440 (Mum). The said decision of the Tribunal in the case of BPL Mobile Communication Ltd. stands upheld by the Hon'ble Bombay Hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enue. The adjudicating authority has observed that though it is correct that they were filing regular returns but the fact that they were not including the value of the sale of SIM card in gross taxable value, it came to the knowledge of the department only when the audit of the company was conducted and detailed investigations made. As such, the said fact was not brought to the department by the appellants themselves, the same amounts to suppression, thus, justifying invocation of longer period of limitation. 7. We have considered the submissions made by both sides. As agreed by both sides that the issue involved is to be decided in the present appeals is as to whether the extended period of limitation is available to the Revenue f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the point of dispute are sufficient for any person to entertain a bona fide belief. In the circumstances, mis-statement or suppression of facts, if any, cannot said to be wilful. 10. We note that the reliance by the learned SDR on the Hon'ble Gujarat Court's decision in the case of Neminath Fabrics reported as 2010 (256) E.L.T. 369 (Guj.) is not correct inasmuch as the issue involved in that case as also in the case of decision of the Apex Court in Mehta & Co. reported as 2011 (264) E.L.T. 481 (S.C.), was on the issue as to whether the period of 5 years would be available to the revenue from the date of search of the factory, when the officers get the knowledge about the clandestine activities of the assessees. 11. By applyi....