Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2023 (7) TMI 768

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. [the appellant]. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order passed by the adjudicating authority confirming the demand of service tax with interest and penalty. 2. The appellant is engaged in rendering 'cargo handling services'. The appellant along with a group of industries, formed a consortium in Siltara and Urla Industrial Area of Raipur in the State of Chhattisgarh for building a 'private railway siding' at Silyari for common use. Later on, two more railway sidings were built at Tadali and at Bhupdeopur and new members joined the consortium. 3. A private railway siding is constructed for the use of the owners of the siding to serve a factory, mill, industry, mine or other private party. The cost of co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the case of the department is that a lesser rate has been charged from the members of the consortium. 7. The period of dispute in Service Tax Appeal No. 50392 of 2018 is 2014-15 and the period of dispute in Service Tax Appeal No. 50393 of 2018 is 2013-14. 8. It transpires from the records that for the previous years, three show cause notices had been issued to the appellant raising demand of service tax on two issues. The first issue was with regard to the demand of service tax on deposits made in favour of the appellant by the members of the consortium. The second was with regard to the demand of service tax on the difference in the rate charged by the appellant from the members of the consortium and non-members for providing 'cargo hand....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es not reflect this position. The Appellant has in some cases charged lesser rate from the non-consortium members as against that charged from consortium members. 41. It has been contended by Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, the rates are agreed between the Appellant and the customers, be they members or non-members of the consortium on purely commercial basis and on factors like : (i) The nature of commodity; (ii) The nature of wagons; (iii) The type of handling required; (iv) Requirement of mechanized handling; (v) Requirement of labour for manual handling; (vi) Storage of commodity after or before loading; (vii) Double and multi handling when a commodity is brought by road, stored and then subsequently loaded ....