2009 (2) TMI 11

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... penalty of Rs.96,194/- imposed on the respondent. 2. Heard the learned DR. There was a representation on behalf of the respondent seeking to decide the appeal on merits taking into account the submissions in the cross-objection filed by the respondent against the said appeal. 3. During the period from April 2002 to March, 2003, the respondent who was rendering services as cable operator has collected totally of Rs.18,05,185/- from the customers and discharged duty liability only a on value of Rs.13,55,590/- and he  did not pay duty on the amounts collected from the subscribers  towards pay channels which was paid to the pay channels. When this was pointed out by the Department, the respondent paid the entire amount of dispu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....all not be taken into account. Similarly, in respect of insurance auxiliary service the Board has clarified  vide Circular dated  9.7.2001 that amount  billed to the client on account of out of pocket expenses which are reimbursable  on actual basis are not subject to service tax. No doubt, these clarifications were issued not in the context of cable operators but the appellant's contention that it created doubt in their mind and therefore,  they did not include this amount reimbursed/paid to the pay channels for discharging their service tax liability appears to be acceptable. Hence, I hold that they had bona fide belief that the amount collected from their customers and paid to the pay channels is not liable for i....