TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 1095
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d of Business Auxiliary Service for the activity of Epoxy Coating of pipelines undertaken by the appellant. The demand was raised after an audit objection. Learned counsel argued that the demand under the head of Business Auxiliary Service cannot be made for the following reasons: i. The only activity of 'production' of goods on behalf of client was leviable to service tax prior to 16.06.2005 and only w.e.f. 16.06.2005, the activity of 'production or processing' of goods or on behalf of client was made liable to service tax. It has been argued that since the period pertains to prior to 16.06.2005 and the activity of Epoxy Coating of pipes does not qualify as "production" of goods and therefore, the said activity is not covered under Busin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e said decision of Tribunal has been approved by Hon'ble High Court as reported in 2011 (23) STR 116. He also relied on the following decisions: * Hoganas India Ltd. 2015 (39) STR 147 (Tri. Mum.) * Orient Packaging Ltd. 2011 (23) STR 167 (Tri. Del.) * PSL Limited 2009 (16) STR 247 (Tri. Ahd.) 4. We have considered rival submissions. We find that the issue in the appellant's own case has been examined by the Tribunal earlier and the matter has been settled by Hon'ble High Court in the following terms: "6. As can be seen from the impugned order of the Tribunal, on merits the Tribunal has held against the respondent by holding that the respondent was covered even under the un-amended definition of "Business Auxiliary Service". After h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed the entire duty demand. Moreover, as noted by the Tribunal the duty demand was also required to be re-quantified in the context of the submission of the respondent that the services prior to 10-9-04, that is, when clause (v) was inserted in the definition of "business auxiliary services" so as to include 'production of goods on behalf of the client'; were required to be excluded." 8. Insofar as the liability of the respondent to pay service tax is concerned it is an admitted position that the liability arose only with effect from 10-9-2004 when clause (v) came to be inserted in the definition of "business auxiliary services" so as to include 'production of goods on behalf of the client'. Hence, it cannot be gainsaid that the services ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enue never advised the respondent to start paying tax on the said activity. The Tribunal, therefore, found that it cannot be said that there was any suppression or intent on the part of the respondent to evade service tax and accordingly, did not find any reason for imposition of penalty upon the respondent, and set aside the same in terms of Section 80 of the Act. 10. Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 reads thus : "80. Penalty not to be imposed in certain cases Notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of section 76, section 77 or section 78, no penalty shall be imposable on the assessee for any failure referred to in the said provisions, if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure" ....