TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 822
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther Service Tax can be demanded by invoking the extended period of limitation. 2. As per the impugned order, Service Tax was demanded for the period from 2004-2005, to F.Y. 2007-2008. Show Cause Notice was issued on 29.07.2009. As part of investigation, statements were recorded from the partner of the Appellant and he has accepted that they have received charges for the said supply from railways. Though they have taken Service Tax registration in 2006 under the category of "Outdoor Catering and Dry Cleaning service", they have not paid service tax on the amount received from Railway Divisions in respect of supply of bed rolls on the reasonable believe that the service provided by them was not liable to service tax. Thereafter, Adjudicatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct in the Show Cause Notice or in the impugned order to invoke the extended period of limitation. Ld. Counsel relied on large number of decisions including CCE Vs M/s Chemphar Drugs, M/s Cosmic Dye Chemical Vs. CCE (S.C) and M/s Anand Nishikawa Co. Ltd Vs. CCE (S.C)). 5. Ld. Counsel further drew our attention to Para 11 of the impugned order where the Adjudication Authority justified the action of invoking the extended period on the ground that the Appellant had contravened the provision. In this regard Ld. Counsel submits that mere allegation regarding contravention of provision and Act/Rules are not enough to reach a finding regarding suppression of fact to invoke extended period of limitation. Ld. Counsel relied on the following decisio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owing the quarter in which the payment is received towards the value of taxable services. Accordingly, the service tax to be paid by the appellant was from 5th or 6th December 2004 and as such one-year period of limitation to issue the impugned Show cause is on or before 5th or 6th of December, 2010 (quarterly payment). However, SCN was issued only on 04.01.2010. 8. Ld. Counsel further submits that Service Tax payable by the Service provider is available as input credit to the service recipient. In the present case IRCTC/Railways is the service recipient and it is a Revenue neutral situation. 9. Ld. Authorised Representative for the Revenue reiterated the finding in the impugned order and submits that the issue is no more res integra. As ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d rolls and they have not received any payment from the train passengers to whom such services is provided. Moreover, as submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the Appellant, the Appellant were providing services to IRCTC and if the service tax was charged by the Appellant from the IRCTC in respect of services provided by them, IRCTC would have got cenvat credit for the same in accordance with provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. Moreover, during investigation, when statement was recorded, the partner of the Appellant categorically stated that they were paying service tax for the other activities and having service Tax registration. However, they have not paid service tax for the amount received from the Railway on the presumption that no Serv....