TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 894
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....interest was paid in due course. The appellants are now aggrieved by the order confirming a demand of Rs.42,343/- (Rupees- Forty two thousand, three hundred, forty three only) in respect of "Transport of Goods by Road Service", interest of the like amount under Section 75 of Finance Act, 1994 and imposition of penalty of Rs.3,78,732/- under Section 78 of the ibid. The appellants are primarily engaged in the manufacture of jute products. All finished goods manufactured by the appellants are exported out of India. They also provide taxable services like "Renting of Immoveable Property Service" and "Business Support Service". The KPO service is also provided by the appellants from their office and exported out of India. Audit of the assessee's....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th respect to Service Tax amount of Rs.42,343/-(not paid) they submitted that they were not liable to pay the said tax, since such charges were used for export of goods which is exempted (Notification no.18/2009-ST dated 7/07/2009 & Notification no.31/2012-ST dated 28/06/2012). 3.1 It is the appellants contention that they complied with and fulfilled the basic conditions of the notification inasmuch as the said services were provided to the exporter in relation to transportation of goods by road from a container freight station/inland container depot to the port/airport, enroute to export. They further submitted that since they were unaware of the impugned notification at the material time they however did not follow certain procedural for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion is to be avoided Suksha International v. UOI 1989 (39) E.L.T. 503 (S.C.). The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Limited v. Dy. Commissioner-1991(55) E.L.T. 437 (S.C.), while drawing a distinction between a substantive and procedural condition of technical nature had categorically held that a procedural condition of technical nature can be condoned. The procedure prescribed in the impugned notification are for the purpose of verification of the claims. Since there is no dispute about the rendering of services for export and which is exempted, it is clear that the appellant is rightly eligible for availing the benefit of the notification. Further, it is very clear from the CBEC's circular referred to supr....