2019 (9) TMI 1585

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant: Shri Sumit Wadhwa & Ms Urvahi Kalra, Advocates Present for the Respondent : Shri P Juneja, AR ORDER Present appeal arises out of impugned Order-in-Original dated 02 December, 2014 wherein the learned Commissioner has confirmed a demand of service tax of Rs. 58,55,129/- alongwith interest against the appellant. 2. The appellant is a National Cooperative Development Corporati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....roviding such service and, therefore, was liable to pay service tax. The adjudicating authority did not impose penalties by invoking the provisions of section 80 for the reason that there was a reasonable cause for not paying the service tax in time by the appellant as the appellant, being a Cooperative Development Corporation, could not have gained anything by suppressing facts and had no reason ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the activity of the appellant in disbursing loans may be due to Government policy but the same is governed by the statutory provisions of Finance Act, 1994. It is a matter of fact that the loans were given to sugar factories working on commercial principles and activity of disbursing loans and getting commission for the same is clearly covered by the statutory provisions of section 65(19) of Fina....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dered the merit of tax liability of the appellant. We note that this issue has been examined in detail by the original authority. The fact remains that appellant did disburse the loans to the commercial enterprises in furtherance of their business and they did get the commission. This is not been disputed.. Claim of the party that this is a statutory act and cannot be covered by tax liability is n....