TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 614
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....firmation of demand by the Original Authority, but had reduced the penalty imposed upon the appellant under section 78 to 50%. 2. The appellant manufactures pharmaceutical products, which it also exports. It is registered with the Service Tax Department for providing various taxable services. During the course of audit of the appellant's record on 24.03.2015, it was found that the appellant had shown in its balance sheet that it paid an amount of Rs. 2,96,77,707/- to the United States Food & Drugs Administration as fees to obtain approval to export its products. It appeared to the audit that the amount so paid falls under the category of "Technical Inspection and Certification Agency Service" under section 65 (105) (zzi) of the Finance A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....annot be any allegation of intent of the appellant to evade payment of duty or even suppression of facts. It was open for the officers to scrutinize the returns and call for any records which they deem necessary for the purpose. Evidently, the information regarding the payments made to the USFDA were available in the records of the appellant itself ; (3) Extended period of limitation also cannot be invoked for the reason that the present case is completely revenue neutral. Had the appellant paid service tax on the fees paid to the USFDA for obtaining approval for export of its products, the same would have been available to it as Cenvat credit and, therefore, there cannot be any intention to evade payment of duty and without the in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de by both the sides we find that the issue is no more res integra as the facts are not disputed. The facts in the case are that the appellant had sought certification of their products by Food and Drug Administration, USA for the products manufactured by them. The Food and Drug Administration of USA certifies the quality of the products which enables the appellant to sell the products in USA, where it is statutorily required that the such products needs to be certified by US FDA. It is the case of the appellant that the certification is nothing but a statutory requirement and the amounts paid by them to US FDA are nothing but fees. 5. With regard to the contentions raised by them learned counsel that in order to market the goods i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. Fee as prescribed is charged and the same is ultimately deposited into the Government Treasury. A doubt has arisen whether such activities provided by a sovereign/public authority required to be provided under a statute can be considered as 'provision of service' for the purpose of levy of service tax. 2. The issue has been examined. The Board is of the view that the activities performed by the sovereign/public authorities under the provision of law are in the nature of statutory obligations which are to be fulfilled in accordance with law. The fee collected by them for performing such activities is in the nature of compulsory levy as per the provisions of the relevant statute, and it is deposited into the Government treasury. S....