2018 (10) TMI 161

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....od January, 2007 to November, 2009, the appellant had provided such taxable service to various clients and deposited the service tax amount on the wages paid to its employees. However, over and above the amount of wages, the appellant also collected 41% levy from the contractee and deposited the said amount with Grocery Markets and Shop Board (GMSB). The department interpreted that 41% levy collected by the appellant should form part of the gross value, on which service tax liability is required to be discharged by the appellant. Further, the department also contended that in respect of gratuity/ex-gratia payments made for supplying the manpower, the appellant should also liable to pay service tax under the taxable category of 'Manpower Rec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat in respect of the taxable service namely Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service, the appellant had collected the service tax from the contractee and deposited the same with the Government exchequer. With regard to the issue of additional 41% of levy paid to GMSB and the payment of gratuity/ex-gratia to the employees, we have perused the letter dated 19.09.2006 addressed by the appellant to the Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner, explaining therein the entire activities undertaken by it including payment of additional levy etc. Relevant paragraphs in the said letter are reproduced below:- "We are registered under Grocery Markets and Shop Board, Mumbai Turbhe to get workers under Mathadi Act. We will procure labours from this Bo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r considered opinion, the proceeding initiated by the department is barred of limitation of time. We find that in an identical situation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Modipon Fibre Company (supra) have held that when the information were furnished by the assessee, notice should have been issued within the normal period and the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. The relevant paragraph in the said judgement is extracted below:- "18. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has confirmed the demand made on the assessee vide show cause notice dated 19-3- 1999 for the period March, 1994 to March, 1997. However the Tribunal found that the demand made by the Department was beyond limitation after the assessee had categorica....