TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 572
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Goods by Road Service'. They are holding proper Service Tax Registration bearing No. AABCR4683AST002. 1.1. During the course of Audit conducted on the records maintained by the appellant for the financial year 2009-10, it was observed that the appellant had short paid Service Tax, totally amounting to Rs.23,01,511/- under the category of 'port services'. 1.2. On scrutiny of Cenvatable invoices, it was noticed by the Audit team that the appellant had taken credit of Service Tax paid on supervision charges as input service relating to Kolkata Port although the said credit could not be termed as input credit in respect of output service for Haldia Port. The Audit has, therefore, observed that the appellant was liable to reverse t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....port cargo (iron ore) and/or GTA service 69,443 E Unloading lorry inside port for export cargo (iron ore) 3,04,513 Total 23,01,511 F Cenvat of Kolkata unit used for Haldia unit through inadvertence 1,81,251 2.1. Regarding the demand of 23,01,511/- confirmed under the category of 'Port Services', the appellant submits that prior to 30.06.2010, services rendered by Port or its authorized agent alone liable to service tax under the category of 'Port Services'. It is pointed out by the appellant in this regard that the scope of 'Port Service' was expanded to cover all activities under taken within the port area only w.e.f. 30.06.2010 and the same has been clarified vide Finance Ministry's Ci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the irregular credit availed by them inadvertently. 2.4. Regarding invocation of extended period of limitation to raise the demand, the appellant has submitted that in this case, the period of demand relates to the financial year 2009-10 but the Show Cause Notice was issued only on 21.04.2014. Further, it is submitted that the instant Show Cause Notice has been issued on the basis of Audit Report in the year 2010 when all the documents were produced by them and the same were scrutinized by the audit officers. As there is no suppression of fact with intention to evade payment of service tax has been established in this case and the matter relates to interpretation of classification of service as provided in Section 65A of the Finance Act,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he demand in this case pertains to the period prior to 30.06.2010, we are of the view that the demand of Service Tax confirmed under the category of 'Port services' is not sustainable. 5.2. In support of this view, we rely on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore v. M/s. Konkan Marine Agencies in Civil Appeal No. 1765 of 2009 dated 11.01.2023. The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced below: "The Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal had allowed the assesses appeal in this case on the ground that the definition of taxable services was expanded with effect from 1.7.2010. So the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal had relied upon i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CESTAT to hold what it did was that the period of demand was prior to the amendment to the definition in this case for the period 2004-2005 to 2006-2007 i.e. much before 01.07.2010. In view of these and following order made by this Court in CA Nos. 2429-30/2008, the present appeal has to suffer the same fate; it is accordingly dismissed." 5.3. We observe that the services rendered by the appellant are appropriately classifiable under the category of 'Cargo Handling Service', as defined under Section 65(23) of the said Finance Act, 1994. We also find that handling of export cargo has been specifically excluded from the purview of service tax under the category of 'Cargo Handling Service', as defined under Section 65(23) of the sa....