TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (10) TMI 134
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of stevedoring within the Mangalore Port. They are licensed by the New Mangalore Port Trust to undertake the above activity. The appellants are also issued with a registration certificate as clearing and forwarding agency within the premises of the port of New Mangalore. They undertake the above activities for various Custom House Agents (Cl-IA) like M/s. Aspinwall & Co. Ltd., M/s. J.M. Bakshi & Co. etc. on sub-contract basis. In some other cases, the appellants receive cargo directly from the customer and not through CHA. In such cases they bill the customer directly. As far as the present appeal is concerned, the dispute relates to the leviability of Service Tax in respect of the value of the taxable services rendered by the appellants in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ervice and C&F service on 29-10-2003 and 18-7-2003. When the departmental auditor visited the appellant's unit they were of the view that the services undertaken by the appellants would fall under the category of port services. Consequently the appellant wrote to the department on 12-4-2004 to cancel the registration under cargo handling service and issue registration under the category of Port Services. In response to the above letter the department wanted various particulars. On 6-7-2004, the appellants received a letter from the department requiring them to pay differential service tax. The appellants informed the department vide their letter dated 12-7-2004 that their principals are paying service tax on the consideration received by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ake credit of the service tax paid by the appellants. In such case it is well settled that no intention to evade payment of duty can be attributed to the person liable to pay duty. The following case laws were relied on. (i)Amco Batteries v. CCE - 2003 (153) E.L.T. 7 (S.C.) (ii)CCE, Mumbai v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. = 2004 (171) E.L.T.159 (S.C.) (iii)CCE Mumbai v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. - 2005 (179) E.L.T.21 (S.C.) (iv)CCE v. Narmada Chematur Pharmaceuticals Ltd. - 2005 (179) E.L.T. 276 (S.C.) (v)CCE v. Narayan Polyplast - 2005 (179) E.L.T 20 (S.C.) 5.1 He stated that the longer period has been invoked in the show cause notice dated 21-2-2005. Therefore the demand is not sustainable. Reliance was placed on the decision ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e trade notices/Board's circulars issued earlier were not rescinded. More over the appellants in their letter dated 12-7-2004 well before the issue of show cause notice informed the department that their principals are paying service tax on the consideration received by them from their clients. He said that nothing prevented the department from verifying the averments of the appellants. 8. On a very careful consideration of the issue, we find that the appellants in their letter dated 12-7-2004 had informed the department that they act as sub-contractors to CHAs and their principals are collecting service tax from the customers including for the services rendered by the appellants. We are reproducing the said letter of the appellants. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uperintendent of Central Excise Service Tax Range Punja Building Annexe Lalbagh, Mangalore Dear Sir, Kindly refer to your letter (dated 6-7-2004. We request to submit following few lines for your kind consideration. We are acting as a Sub-contractor to Customs House Agents like Aspinwall and Co., Arcadia Shipping and Trading Co. etc. We are not dealing with any customers directly. Our Principals (Main Contractor) are collecting ser vice tax from the customers including for the service rendered by us. For the services rendered to our Principals viz. "Stevedoring" (Loading to ship and unloading from ship) and "Clearing Forwarding" (receiving the cargo at Yard and transportation of the same to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntracting CHA raises the bill on the main CHA who inturn raises the bill to the client. It has been decided that in such cases the sub-contracting CHA will not be required to pay service tax on the bills raised by him on the main CHA. The service tax will be payable by the CHA who provides the actual service to the client and raises the bill to the client. 8.2 It is not necessary that CHAs should sub-contract only a particular category of service. They can sub-contract any activity undertaken by them. When they deal with the customers directly and pay service tax there is no need for the sub-contractor to discharge service tax liability. This principle is applicable to all services and not only to particular services as stated by the lea....