2019 (10) TMI 819

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Amit Kumar Prasad, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Rajeev Ranjan, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER: ARCHANA WADHWA After hearing both the sides, we find that service tax of around Rs. 89,216/- stand confirmed against the appellant alongwith penalty of identical amount, for the period January, 2013 to March, 2014 by way of raising a show cause notice dated 07/08/2014. 2. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the period prior to 01/07/2012 i.e. before the introduction of negative list era, the same would not apply to the facts of the case. Similarly he has rejected assessee's contention that the Loader services were exempt from payment of service tax vide older Notification. 3. We find that admittedly period involved in the present appeal is covered by the negative list regime having been introduced ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e assessee in terms of the said Notification No.33/2012-ST. 5. In case the appellant is found liable to pay service tax, the same would be quantified by extending the benefit of cum-tax. 6. As regards the penalty, we find that the appellant being a small scale delivery boy may be entertaining a belief that the services provided by him are not taxable. Further, we also note that the said service....