TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 373
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Nuysell Interactions (P) Ltd., Chennai, the respondents herein were providing services of Event Management, Business Exhibition and Sale of Space for advertisement Services. The respondent's unit charges the customers "Service charges/Stall charges, Advertisement Charges" for the services provided by them relating to organizing of an event of business exhibition, selling of space on the coupons or the advertisement banners displayed in such events or exhibitions. They have opted to discharge the liability towards services to the Government after the receipt of the payments by their clients. Upon scrutiny of audit of the respondent (assessee), it was noticed that there was difference in the taxable value shown in ST3 returns and the Profit a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4,16,667 13,32,637 Total Non-Payment 39,04,099 2.3 The assessee had not paid service tax on stall charges. These are charges for setting up space / stalls for participation in exhibitions etc. The assessee unit charges the customers "Service charges/ Stall charges, Advertisement Charges' for the services provided by them relating to organizing of an event or business exhibition, selling of space on the coupons or the advertisement banners displayed in such events or exhibitions. Respondents have opted to discharge the liability towards service tax to the Government after the receipt of the payments by their clients. 2.4 Service tax was not paid on certain amount under the category of 'export of services' as claimed by them. There....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....without the meeting of the Committee; that there is no proper authorization by the Committee for filing the appeal before Tribunal; that the order and signature of Commissioners bears no date. It is also submitted in the cross-objections [in para 6 (iv)] that the Commissioner (Appeals) order is legal and proper. 4.1 Heard both sides. The issue to be decided in the instant case is whether the demand is hit by limitation as claimed by the respondent and whether they are liable to pay service tax on stall charges, events conducted abroad claiming export of services and media charges during the disputed period. 4.2. The contention of the Revenue in the appeal filed by department is that the demand is not hit by time bar and the assessee is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot be classified under both "Event Management Service" and "Business Exhibition Service" simultaneously by the department. (iii) that having permitted amendment of the registration certificate to incorporate the Business Exhibition Services at a later date, the department had in fact conceded that the service rendered by the assesses falls only under Business Exhibition Service. (iv) that demand has been made without properly classifying the services rendered and therefore demand made without classification is not sustainable. (v) that in the ST-3 forms filed periodically, the assessee had given details regarding export of services and had also furnished letter from High Commission in Colombo, NOC issued by Indian Trade Promotion O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s) has found that the services rendered by assessee to the registered newsletter during the disputed period is exempted from service tax as per provisions of law in Section 65(105) (zzzm) ibid. 4.6 We are not able to find any infirmity in these findings. It is not the allegation that assessee had not filed ST-3 returns. There are no justifiable reasons or grounds to allege suppression or fraud etc. with intention to evade payment of tax on the part of the assessee. Even as early as 23.09.2004, assessee had submitted a letter addressed to the department wherein they had informed the scope of nature of their activities. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the Commissioner (Appeals) is correct in ordering that the extended period....