TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 260
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gistered for providing the services under the category of 'Authorised Service Station'. The Department during the audit, noticed that the appellants had not paid the service tax on the amount of rate paid by them during the period 2005-06 to 2009-10 and on the rental income received by them during period. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice No. V (30) dated 18/05/2011 was issued upon the appellant proposing the recovery of service tax amounting to Rs. 3,94,829/- along with interest and the proportionate penalties. The said proposal was confirmed vide the Order-in-Original No. 1106 dated 31/03/13 except for the tax liability qua 'Renting of immovable property services' for the period prior 2006-07. Appeal thereof has been rejected vide the orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sted for benefit of that confusion to be extended in their favour and the Department is prayed to be denied entitled for invoking the extended period of limitation. The demand confirmed is, accordingly, prayed to be dropped as being barred by time. Ld. Counsel has relied upon in Thadi Satya Ramalinga Reddy, vs. CCE, ST & CUS, Visakhapatnam-II reported as [2017 (4) GSTL 421 (Tri-Hydb)]. With the submissions the order under challenge is prayed to be set aside and appeal is prayed to be allowed. 6. While rebutting these arguments Ld. DR has submitted that the demand with respect of GTA services has been raised based upon the balance sheet as were noticed by the Department during the audit, wherein the appellant has specifically mentioned the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....consignment note by whatever name called. 10. Perusal thereof clarifies that liability to pay the service tax under reversed charged mechanism arises only when the services are received from the goods transport agency that to when such agency has issued a consignment note. In the present case, admittedly and apparently, there is no consignment note. The liability has been confirmed on the basis of mention of charges being paid by the appellant as freight as per their balance sheet. No question arises for considering as to whether mere payment of freight to a transporter amounts to receiving a goods 'transport agency service' when the aforesaid definition clearly specifies that such service has to be received from a transport agency only an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect from 2005-06 to 2009-10. The Adjudicating Authority below committed no error while dropping this demand for the period prior to year 2007 as this service was brought into the tax net vide a Notification of the year 2007. With respect to the remaining period the demand has been challenged for the Show Cause Notice being barred by time. 13. We observe that the taxability was introduced for the first time in the year 2007 that too by way of issuance of mere Notification. The amendment in Finance Act was brought into effect only in the year 2010, though with retrospective effect. There was a subsequent amendment by introducing sub-Section 2 to Section 80 of the Finance Act by which the assessee would given a chance to clear arrears of serv....