2020 (2) TMI 191

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....>MR. ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR.SANJIV SRIVASTAVA , MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Present for the Appellant: , None Present for the Respondent: Shri Vijay Gupta, AR ORDER The appellants are in appeal against the impugned orders demanding service tax under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Service' along with interest and imposing penalty on all the appellants. 2. The facts of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r themselves as distributors and introduce D -E and F -G another two customers each. The discount allowed to D-E and F-G goes to these purchasers and part goes to BC-A. The tree of distributors goes up, the discount comes down the line. On these discounts received by the appellants, the Revenue sought to demand service tax under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Service'. Therefore, the show cau....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ein it has been held that the extended period of limitation is not invokable. Consequently, the demands pertaining to the extended period of limitation are not sustainable and no penalty is impossible on all the appellants. 4. On the other hand, Ld.AR heavily relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Surendra Singh Rathore (supra) to say that the extended period is also invokable i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd others vs. CST, Indore (supra), the Tribunal has held that the extended period of limitation is not invokable. 9. As the issue has been decided by this Tribunal in the case of Charanjeet Singh Khanuja and others vs. CST, Indore (supra) and this decision has been followed in various cases. Like in the case of Shri Bhairu Dan Karwa and others vs. CCE, Jaipur, vide Final Order No.54386-54390/20....