TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 18
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppers, polyethylene resin and master batches. They availed the facility of various shipping agencies and incurred expenses on ocean freight which as per Notification No.15/2017-ST dated 13.04.2017 was leviable to service tax under reverse charge basis w.e.f. 23.04.2017. The department initiated investigation against the appellant by calling for the copies of the Bills of entry and also recorded the statements of Shri Deepak Shahdadpuri, DGM Finance on 09.04.2019. After conducting investigation, the department issued a show cause notice dated 11.10.2019 demanding service tax of Rs.84,31,277/- (including Swachh Bharat Cess (SBC) and Krishi Kalyan Cess (KKC)) under proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 74(1) of CG....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case of All India Federation of Tax Practitioners Vs. Union of India reported at [2007] 9 VST 126 (SC), it was held that service tax is a destination based consumption tax and thus, the relevance of the place where the services are rendered or consumed assumes critical importance for sustaining the levy of service tax. In the present case, the service is finally consumed at Indian Port. • Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has clearly erred in ignoring the relevant provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 which are crucial for levy of service tax on impugned service. Section 66C(2) states that sub section 1 of Section 66C shall not be invalid merely on the grounds that both service provider and service receiver are located at place outside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d the most effective, whatever stages it may be. The Central Government is therefore legally competent to evolve suitable machinery for collection of the service tax subject to the maintenance of a rational connection between the tax and the person on whom it is imposed. It is outside the judicial ken to determine whether the Parliament should have specified a common mode for recovery of the tax as a convenient administrative measure in respect of a particular class. That is ultimately a question of policy, which/must be left to legislative wisdom". • A nine member Constitutional Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries Limited vs Union of India [1997(89)E.L.T 247 (SC)] has held that : "104....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oses some difficulty. Reddy, J. has held that in all cases, except where unconstitutionality is alleged, the remedy is to be pursued within the framework of the Excise Act. This is a dangerous proposition for it will not cater to situations where the authorities under the Excise Act assume authority in cases where there is an inherent lack of jurisdiction. This is because, if one were to follow Reddy, J.'s reasoning, the authorities under the Act will have the final say over situations in which they totally lack inherent jurisdiction. In such a situation, there is nothing to prevent the authorities from exercising jurisdiction in cases which are ultra vires the Excise Act but intra vires the Constitution. To that extent, I would hold that i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eriod applicable will be that specified in Section 17(1)(c) of the Limitation Act." In view of the above, they prayed to examine whether the order of the Commissioner (Appeal) is correct in allowing the appeal of the party and pass a suitable order. 3. Learned AR during arguments, reiterated the grounds taken by Revenue in their appeal. He also mentioned that the appeal against the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in SAL Steel Case is still pending before Hon'ble Apex Court. He prayed to grant relief to the department by setting aside the order passed by the Appellate Authority. 4. Learned Counsel for the respondent argued that the matter regarding leviability of service tax on Ocean Freight is no more res-integra after the d....