TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 998
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peals filed by the Revenue and M/s Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited [Jodhpur Vidyut] involve the same issues and hence they are being disposed of together. 2. Service Tax Appeal No. 50123 of 2025 has been filed by the Revenue to assail the order dated 26.09.2024 passed by the Principal Commissioner in which he decided the proposals in the Show Cause Notice dated 04.04.2019 issued to M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. [Ajmer Vidyut] covering the period 01.10.2013 to 31.03.2016. However, he kept the decisions covering the period 01.04.2016 to 30.06.2017 pending in view of the directions of the High Court in orders dated 12.03.2024 and 24.04.2024 in CWP No. 9908 of 2019. The period 01.04.2016 to 30.06.2017 was within the normal period of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hall have effect, as if, for the words "eighteen months", the words "five years" had been substituted. Explanation. - Where the service of the notice is stayed by an order of a court, the period of such stay shall be excluded in computing the aforesaid period of 'eighteen months' or five years, as the case may be." 3. As may be seen, if any service tax was not paid or short paid, a notice under section 73 can be issued within the normal period of limitation of 30 months. However, if such short payment of nonpayment, was by reason of fraud, collusion, willful mis-statement or suppression of facts or violation of Act of Rules with an intent to evade payment of service tax, notice can be issued within the extended period of limitat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... declared in the column for exempted services in the Returns. Ajmer Vidyut did not indicate these receipts at all nor had it paid any tax on them and the department came to know about all these receipts only through investigation. Therefore, material facts were withheld from the department. (ii) Ajmer Vidyut also failed to respond to summons dated 09.01.2018, 10.09.2018, 03.12.2018 and 02.01.2019 and provide month-wise details of wheeling charges and cross subsidy surcharges collected by it. Finally, it provided the information only on 28.01.2019. (iii) In view of the above the ingredients necessary to invoke the proviso to section 73 (1) of the Act have been established. 6. In view of the above, it is prayed that the i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble. 10. It is well-established that in order to invoke extended period of limitation one of the elements namely fraud, collusion, willful misstatement, suppression of facts or violation of Act or Rules with intent to evade must be established. In other words, mens rea is an essential ingredient to invoke extended period of limitation. To raise a demand for extended period of limitation, one of the above factors must be established including the intent to evade. Ajmer Vidyut would, obviously, not pay service tax on charges which it considered were not leviable to service tax. It may not even consider them as consideration for some services provided by it. In this case, not only Ajmer Vidyut but even the Finance Ministry itself was not su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tor undertaking, supplies power to customers. However, there are also private producers who generate and sell power to customers. To transmit it from their power plant to the customers, they use the transmission and distribution network of Jodhpur Vidyut and pay Jodhput Vidyut an amount known as wheeling charges. The case of the department is that these charges are chargeable to service tax under section 66E(e) of the Finance Act. Cross-subsidy charges are collected as per the Electricity Act and Regulations by Jodhpur Vidyut to meet the requirements of current level of cross subsidy within the area of supply of the distribution licence. Jodhpur Vidyut and other public sector companies provide power cheap to priority sector consumers and ch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellant, since it is an activity related to transmission of electricity and also that the main activity of transmission is done by the appellant, 'wheeling charges' would not be leviable to service tax in view of the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Torrent Power. The appellant had not agreed to tolerate any act of any person by transmitting electricity through its network. Therefore, wheeling service would not be leviable to service tax and it cannot be termed as a declared service as it does not fall within the meaning of section 66E(e) of the Finance Act. 29. Collection of cross subsidy charges is provided under the Electricity Act and the Regulations to meet the requirements of current level of cross subsidy within the ....