2025 (8) TMI 499

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Allahabad, whereby the Appellate Authority confirmed the service tax liability amounting to Rs.93,64,596/-, along with interest under Section 75 and a penalty of an equivalent amount under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Appellate Authority also upheld the penalties imposed by the Adjudicating Authority under Sections 77(1)(b) and 77(1)(c) of the said Act. 2. The facts relevant for the disposal of the present appeal are that the officers of the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGSTI) gathered intelligence indicating that M/s Pooja Dry Cleaners, bearing Service Tax Registration No.ALWPK3517DSD001 (hereinafter referred to as "the appellant"), was engaged in providing dry cleaning and mechanized washing services to Indian ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... proposed to appropriate Rs.38,35,457/- deposited by the Appellant during investigation against the proposed demand. The proposals in the SCN were confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority, and subsequently upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Aggrieved by the said appellate order, the Appellant has preferred the present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. We have heard Shri Vineet Kumar Singh, Learned Advocate for the Appellant, and Shri A. K. Choudhary, Learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue. 4. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant had entered into an agreement dated 15.12.2015 with Indian Railways through its Divisional Railway Manager, Allahabad, for the collection, transportation, mechanized wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or doubt that goods were not dutiable - Dutiability of goods in doubt because of Trade notices . Unless there is evidence that the manufacturer knew that goods were liable to duty or he was required to take out a licence. For invoking extended period of five years limitation duty should not had been paid, short-levied or short paid or erroneously refunded because of either any fraud, collusion or wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts or contravention of any provision of the Act or Rules made thereunder. These ingredients postulate a positive act, therefore, failure to pay duty or take out a licence is not necessary due to fraud or collusion or wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts or contravention of any provisions of the Act.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....under a bona fide belief that its services were exempt. Accordingly, the invocation of the extended period under the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 is unsustainable. 9. The Learned Counsel also pointed out that although the SCN makes a passing reference to collection of service tax by the appellant from the Railways, the facts establish that the Railways had neither paid nor reimbursed any service tax. Further, even if it is presumed that any amount was collected as service tax, recovery of the same can only be made under Section 73A of the Finance Act, 1994. However, the SCN in the present case does not invoke Section 73A, and therefore, such a ground cannot be a basis for confirming the demand in this proceeding. Rel....