Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2007 (5) TMI 631

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... lakhs (along with Education Cess) from them in respect of "Business Auxiliary Service". Both these demands, for the period 16-7-2001 to 30-9-2005, are under the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994, in adjudication of a show-cause notice, wherein it was inter alia alleged that a major part of the services had been rendered by the appellants as sub-contractors of M/s. South India Corporation Ltd., M/s. Sea Port Logistics Ltd., M/s. SICAL Logistics etc. It appears from the records that there are 9 agencies (including the said 3 parties) who employed the appellants as sub-contractors for rendering services in the Chennai port area. The rest of the demand of tax is on "Port Services" directly rendered by the appellants to their cl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ause notices, which were issued to M/s. South India Corporation Ltd., M/s. Sea Port Logistics Ltd. and M/s. SICAL Logistics, have been placed on record by counsel. Learned Counsel has also referred to para 11.5 of the impugned order in his endeavour to establish that there can be no demand on the appellants (sub-contractors) when Service Tax on the same services has been demanded from the main parties. In this connection, learned senior counsel has referred to the departmental clarifications reported in 2003 (158) E.L.T. (T.33). The clarification was on the question whether a sub-contractor was supposed to take out a registration and discharge tax liability if there was a total sub-contract of the service. The clarification was to the effec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rporation Ltd. demanded Service Tax of over Rs. 16 crores for the period 16-7-2001 to 30-9-2005; the one issued to M/s. Sea Port Logistics Ltd. demanded Service Tax of over Rs. 4.4 crores for the same period; and the one issued to M/s. SICAL Logistics demanded over Rs. 8.4 crores towards Service Tax for the same period. The Service Tax amounts demanded by learned Commissioner from the appellants for the same services, according to leaned senior Counsel are Rs. 1.07 crores, Rs. 56.75 lakhs and Rs. 1.51 crores respectively. It is the case of the appellants that these amounts are already covered by the demands raised on M/s. South India Corporation Ltd., M/s. Sea Port Logistics Ltd. and M/s. SICAL Logistics. The same plea of double taxation ha....