TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1025
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... M/s. Transworld Terminals Private Limited, Bharat CFS, Zone-I, AP & SEZ, Mundra, Kutch, Gujarat are the respondent in the matter. The respondents were issued a show cause notice bearing No. V.ST/STR-Mundra/ ST Division/ Jt. Commr./ 29/ 2016-17 on 15.03.2017, mentioning that they were engaged in providing output services such are "CARGO Handling Services" and "Storage & Warehousing Services" of import and export Cargo. The services provided by them also included exempt services such as Handling of export of Agricultural produce related services and Maintenance and Repair Services to the extent of value of material/goods which were not taxable. 1.1 Based on the observations of the CERA, the department alleged that during the period from 201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e to service tax. He held that the activity of handling export cargo has been kept out of service net and it can not be considered "exempt service". Hence, no reversal is required under Rule 6(3) of the CCR, 2004. He also dropped the demand of Rs. 12,98,736/- for reversal of Cenvat Credit on the value of GTA Service and demand of Rs.9,33,291/- on reversal of credit on the value of the materials supplied. The penalties imposed by the lower authority were also set aside. Aggrieved with the above order, the department has filed the present appeal. 1.3 In the appeal dated 22.07.2019, the department has relied on, the definition of "exempted service" under erstwhile Rule 2(e) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which reads as under :- Rule 2(e) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hey had two registrations which later on, were merged and they started filing returns under single registration. A common show cause notice is issued for both the registrations and hence, such a practice is not correct. The appeal should be dismissed on this aspect itself. He argued that the decision which department is relying on in St. John CFS Park Pvt. Ltd case (supra) was an Interim order. The final decision pronounced as reported in 2023 TIOL-407-CESTAT-Madras, is in the favour of the assessee. He argues that the case of the department is not on merits and therefore, appeal filed by them should be dismissed. 3.1 He also mentions that the disputed activity is not an exempt service by virtue of any exemption Notification or Circular. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f CGST and C. Ex., Dibrugarh Commissionerate, [2023-TIOL-614-CESTAT-KOL] * M/s. Bedmutha Industries vs. CCE & ST Nashik [2019-TIOL-445-CESTAT-MUM] * Innovative Incentive and Events Pvt Ltd vs. CCE [2024-TIOL-1035-CESTAT-CHD] * Vandana Global Ltd vs. Commr. CGST & C.Ex. [2022 (56) G.S.T.L. 310 (Tri.-Del)] 4. We have seen the records of the case and heard rival submissions. 4.1 Before taking up the case on merits, the issue of limitation as argued by the Learned Advocate on behalf of the Respondent need to be discussed first. We find that the respondent has been audited for the period from April, 2008 to 2012 on 17.04.2013, again from September, 2011 to March 2013 (in respect of second registration) on 10.03.2014 and then for the peri....