Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

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

2019 (5) TMI 235

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he penalties of equal amount. However, the demand of Service Tax for an around of Rs. 3,12,902/- was dropped. The said order was challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals). However, vide Order-in-Appeal No.325 dated 09.08.2011, the appeal was rejected. Hence the appellant is before this Tribunal. 2. Heard Ms. Rinki Arora, ld. Advocate for the appellant and Mr. G.R. Singh, ld. D.R. for the Revenue. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the adjudicating authorities have wrongly held the services of the appellant while holding it to be the cargo handling services. Despite that the activity is only of loading of urea and charcoal and unloading the collection of loose urea that too through a conveyer belt of the factory. The issue is no more res integra. The demand of Rs. 5,36,325/- is prayed to be set aside for the said services. 4. With respect to commercial and industrial services, the appellant has submitted that liability has already been discharged while availing the benefit of Notification No.15/2004 dated 10.09.2004. This demand of Rs. 13,54,295/- has been wrongly confirmed. The decision of Larger Bench in the case of Bhayana Builders (P) Ltd. vs. CCE report....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ith all the contentions of the appellant as raised before this Tribunal. There has been a specific reasoning given in the order, which has been passed relying upon the various decisions of the Tribunal and the higher Courts as well as on the Board's clarifications and directions. Hence, there is no infirmity in the order. Appeal is prayed to be dismissed. 11. After hearing both the parties, the activity-wise findings are as follows:- CARGO HANDLING SERVICE: 11.1 The definition is important for the purpose, which defines Taxable Services and particularly "Cargo Handling Services" as under:- Clause 90 ".............taxable services means any service provided (zr) to any person by a Cargo Handling Agency in relation to Cargo Handling Services." The Dictionary meaning of word "Cargo" defined in various Dictionaries are as under :- Webster's Dictionary: 'Cargo' - Goods and Merchandise taken on abroad, vessel, aircraft etc. Webster's IX New Collegiate Dictionary: 'Cargo' - Goods or Merchandise conveyed in ship, aeroplane or vehicle. Thus, it is evident that word 'Cargo' means carriage of luggage in ship, vessel or aircraft. 11.1.1 In the present case, t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rified by the board, in the cases where some material were provided by the service recipient, the taxable value can be computed by including the value of such material but denial of abatement on this ground that some material were provided by the service recipient is clearly against the law and is against the principle of natural justice too. The appellant has already deposited the full amount of tax by computing the value as prescribed under notification. The adjudicating authority has illegally denied the benefit of abatement available to the appellant and, therefore, the order so passed should be set aside." 11.2.1 The Commissioner (Appeals) has mentioned that while availing the benefit of Notification No.15/2004, the appellant was required to include the value of free supply. We perused both these Notifications in the light of the Board Circular No.80/102004/ST dated 17.09.2004 wherein it is recorded as follows:- 13.5 The gross value charged by the building contractors include the material cost, namely, the cost of cement, steel, fittings and fixtures, tiles etc. Under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the service provider can take credit of excise duty paid on such inputs. H....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....demand has been raised based on Bill No.1383 dated 21.03.2006 apparently the same pertains to the work of extension of godown, which from no stretch of imagination can be called as excavation. Mere mention in the said bill of excavation of godown is mere way of nomenclating by the service provider or the recipient. The same cannot be a ground for denying that the service provided was merely of extension of the godown. There is otherwise no dispute to the said fact. Confirmation of the demand merely on the nomenclature of the service is liable to be set aside. Therefore, the demand of Rs. 1,42,978/- is also hereby set aside. RENT-A-CAB SERVICE 11.6 The appellants have relied upon the certificate given by Ghiya services, the sister concern of the appellant declaring that they have duly paid service tax on the taxing higher income received from DCM Shriram Consolidated Ltd. to whom the taxis taken on rent from Khandelwal Construction Co. during the year 2004-05 and 2005-06 were supplied also that no service tax credit has been taken by them. The document is very much on record. But the adjudicating authority has failed to consider the same. Once the service tax liability stands al....