AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 1065
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he captioned appeals. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in providing various services in mining areas. During the course of audit, the audit team compared the value of services appearing in Profit & Loss Account along with the S.T.-3 Return for the period 2006-07 to 2009-10 and found that appellant had not paid service tax of differential value of services provided during the relevant period. Therefore, a Show Cause Notice dated 14.10.2011 was issued to the appellant alleging short payment of Service Tax, which was to be paid by the appellant along with interest and penalty. The basis of the Show Cause Notice was that the appellant had received work orders from various business entities wherein appellant was enga....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed at the premises of the appellant on 24.12.2013 and a Show Cause Notice dated 09.07.2014 was issued for the period from 2012-13 to 2013-14 by invoking the extended period of limitation alleging that as the activity undertaken by the appellant for transportation within the mining area falls under the category of mining services, therefore, service tax was payable by the appellant under the category of 'mining service' for the said period. 3.1. The appellant contested the said Show Cause Notice, but the demand of service tax was of Rs.2,28,37,002/-was confirmed, along with interest and penalties, vide the impugned order dated 28.10.2016. 4. Aggrieved from the said orders, the appellant is before us. 5. The Ld. Counsel appearing on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bunal in the case of M/s. Maa Kalika Transport Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of CGST & C.E. Rourkela, 2023 (79) GSTL 263, (Tri-Kolkata) and hence, no Service Tax is payable by the appellant. 5.2. It is also his submission that the appellant was paying service tax for the taxable services during the impugned period, but Show Cause Notices have been issued by invoking the extended period of limitation. As activity of the appellant was known, as per the Service Tax Returns filed by the appellant, therefore, it is his contention that the Show Cause Notices issued to the appellant are barred by limitation. 5.3. It is further submitted that for the period post July 2012, when the negative regime came into force, no demand is sustainable unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....served as under: - "13. We observe that the Ld. Commissioner has arrived at the conclusion that the Appellant has provided multiple services in the form of loading, unloading, handling, providing trucks, obtaining delivery orders obtaining mining permission etc. and hence the services provided are not mere transportation. We observe that the contract is a composite contract primarily for the purpose of transportation of coal beyond 180 to 200 KM. The activities like loading, unloading obtaining delivery orders etc. are incidental or ancillary to the transportation service. The contract has not provided any separate charges for these activities. The composite contract cannot be vivisected to arrive at the value of service for each a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... service, namely, the transportation of goods by road. The contention that a single composite service should not be broken into its components and classified as separate services is a well-accepted principle of classification. As clarified earlier vide F.No. 334/4/2006- TRU, dated 28-2-2006 (paras 3.2 and 3.3) and F. No. 334. 1/2008-TRU, dated 29-2-2008 (paras 3.2 and 3.3) a composite service, even if it consists of more than one service, should be treated as a single service based on the main or principal service and accordingly classified. While taking a view, both the form and substance of the transaction are to be taken into account. The guiding principle is to identify the essential features of the transaction. The method of invoicing ....