TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (9) TMI 12
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 29th March, 2004 upholding the order-in-original imposing the penalty of Rs.500/- under Section 75-A of the Finance Act, 1994, for failure to apply for registration under Section 69 within the prescribed time limit, and further penalty of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 77 of the said Act for failure to furnish ST-3 return under Section 70 of the Act read with Rule 7 of the Service Tax Rules, 1944 with the direction to obtain Service Tax Registration and pay Service Tax due forthwith, with interest and file ST-3 returns. 3. A show cause notice came to be issued on 04.11.2003 against the Assistant District Excise Officer of the Madhya Pradesh State Excise Warehouse on the ground that neither Service Tax Registration was taken nor Servic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion or manufacture in India on the property of a State used for purposes other than those specified in clause (2) of that Article (see paragraph 31), that the "Storage and Warehousing Service" was not exempt from Union taxation under Article 289 (1) of the Constitution and that the said activity was a commercial activity falling within the purview of Service Tax. Therefore, warehousing of Indian made foreign liquor fell within the purview of Service Tax under the category of "Storage and Warehousing Service" and the Excise Department of the State Government was required to take registration and file return. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that, there was nothing in Clause (1) of Article 289 of the Constitution that would prevent the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e ambit of the provisions of Service Tax Rules, 1994, the Appellate Commissioner held that, the services provided by the appellants squarely fall within the ambit of taxable services and the charges recovered were subject to payment of the Service Tax. 6. The present appeals have been filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh through the Assistant District Excise Officer against the Commissioners have made the impugned orders. Therefore, it is not a dispute between the State and the Union of India in their Constitutional capacity. We, therefore, 7. There is no dispute over the fact that the Service Tax is sought to be charged on the supervision charges imposed by the State Government under Section 28-A of the Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 191....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e person manufacturing, importing, exporting, transporting, storing, selling, purchasing, using collecting or cultivating the intoxicant or denatured spirituous preparations shall pay to the State Government towards the supervision charges as levy as may be imposed by the State Government in this behalf: Provided that the State Government may exempt any class of person or any Institution from paying the whole or any part of such levy." 8.1 It will be clear from the above provision that the "levy" could be imposed by a general or special order by the State Government in cases where it was directed that the manufacture, import, export, transport, storage etc. of any intoxicant or denatured spirituous preparations or hemp shall be under ....