TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 498
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issioner of Central Excise and Customs, Cochin/Department is the appellant. M/s. GAC Shipping (India) Pvt. Ltd, Willingdon Island/assessee is the respondent. 2. The assessee is running Steamer Agency services and Customs House Agency services at Kochi and a few different ports in India. The services rendered by the assessee fall under Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 (for short, 'the Act'). The Department is in appeal against the final order dated 31.10.2016 in ST/216 & 217/2008 of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Bangalore. The orders of the primary authority, appellate authority etc are stated in the following tabular form: Show-cause notice Order-In-Original Final Order in Order of Appeal Order-In-Or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vice tax laws provide clear and distinguishable procedures for maintaining accounts and filing periodic returns? (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the entire demand made in the Show Cause Notice was based on the details found in the books of accounts maintained by the respondent and no specific grounds had been made regarding the suppression of facts, when the respondent did not disclose the information willingly and all the above facts came to light only because of the scrutiny of the records by the Audit Department in relation to the activities of the respondent? 4. Heard learned Advocate Mr. P.G. Jayashankar for the appellant and the learned Senior Advocate M....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... justifiable under any one of the circumstances covered by Section 73 of the Act. Alternatively, whether the period of five-year limitation is attracted to the case or not. The earlier round of litigation is not referred to in this Judgment, because the grounds now raised by the appellant take support from the judgment of this Court between the parties herein for the same assessment years, in C.E.A Nos.16 & 17 of 2010 dated 26.03.2012. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant invited our attention to the following paragraph in the judgment dated 26.03.2012: In view of the findings above, we allow both the Central Excise Appeals by vacating the orders of the Tribunals and restore the appeals back to the files of the Tribunal with di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounds have been made regarding how the assessee has indulged in suppression with intent to evade payment of service tax. The entire case has arisen on account of the fact that the assessee's operations are complex and in different parts of the country and could not readily furnish the split up of location-wise. To compound matters, they have centralised registrations in more than one place for some services and at the same time having individual registrations in many other places. In this background, we are of the view that there is no justification to say that the assessee has suppressed facts with intent to evade payment of service tax. Consequently, the demand for service tax will have to be limited within the normal period of limita....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the findings recorded on the extended period of limitation under Section 73 of the Act, are perverse, unavailable and the case on hand, squarely falls within Section 73 of the Act, where the extended period of limitation could be available. The remand has a limited scope, and the order is illegal and liable to be set aside. 7. Learned Senior Advocate Joseph Kodianthara contends that the understanding of the judgment dated 26.03.2012 of this Court by the appellant is erroneous. This Court vide judgment dated 26.03.2012 found fault with a few findings recorded by the Tribunal in its order dated 26.09.2009 and remitted the matter. The Tribunal has appreciated the case and recorded findings available in this behalf which are within its juris....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... On perusal of the show cause notice, we find that no specific grounds have been made regarding how the assessee has indulged in suppression with intent to evade payment of service tax. The entire case has arisen on account of the fact that the assessee's operations are complex and in different parts of the country and could not readily furnish the split-up of location-wise." 8.2 The appellant does not contest the finding of fact recorded as incorrect before us. It is a simple finding of fact, which could be recorded by the Tribunal within its jurisdiction pursuant to the remand ordered by this Court in C.E.A Nos. 16 & 17 of 2010. 9. Upon due verification of record, and the scope of appeal, we are constrained to record that the finding o....