M/s. Janton Versus Commissioner of CGST & CX, Kolkata
Service Tax
2018 (11) TMI 745 – CESTAT KOLKATA – TMI
CESTAT KOLKATA – AT
Dated:- 18-9-2018
MA(EH)-76964/2018 in Appeal No. ST/75430/2018 – MO/75825/2018 & FO/76662/2018
Service Tax
SHRI P.K.CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND SHRI BIJAY KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
Shri Arijit Chakrabarti & Nilotpal Chowdhury, Advocates, for the Appellant (s)
Shri S. Mukhopadhyay, Suptd. (A. R.) for the Revenue
ORDER
This appeal was listed before the Single Member Bench on 31/05/2018 for hearing. The Bench directed the registry to list the appeal before the Division Bench. The appellant filed the Miscellaneous Application for early hearing on 12/09/2018 vide MA(EH) 76964/2018. The matter was listed for Early Hearing. After hearing both sides, the Miscellaneous Application for Early Hearing was allowed. Further, with the consent of both sides, the appeal itself was taken up for hearing.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the cas
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Advocate further submits that the Show Cause Notice was issued purely on the basis of the balance sheet figures as disclosed by the appellant without scrutinizing the relevant documents such as bills, ledgers etc.
The Ld. Advocate vehemently argued that the Adjudicating Authority has erred by not following the relevant provisions of the statute relating to cum-tax Valuation and exemption/abatement available to the appellant. It is his submission that even the Cenvat Credit of Rs. 4,16,374/-, has not been allowed which is legally available to the appellant on the basis of available documents even though when there was no allegation in this regard in the Show Cause Notice.
The Ld. Adv. further argued that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has not discussed regarding the claim of Cenvat Credit of Rs. 4,16,374/- in the impugned order though a quantification sheet for the Cenvat Credit as available to the appellant, duly supported by the invoices were placed before the First Appellate Author
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
he case of the appellant that a portion of the “Carriage Charges” involved expenses incurred for service other than 'transport of goods by road', which merits deduction from the taxable value. Further, there are number of individual consignments below the Threshold Exemption Limit (Rs.750/Rs.1500) which also merits deduction but have not been considered by the Lower Authority.
6. Further, the benefit of cum-tax quantification of tax liability as available under Section 67 (2) of the Act should have been extended to the appellant assessee.
7. The Ld. DR reiterates the orders of the Lower Authorities.
8. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records.
9. We find that the entire demand of Service Tax is as under:-
SI No.
Category of Service
Amount of Service Tax including Cess
01.
Business Auxiliary Service (Commission on Consignment Sale for the period 2007 to March 2012
7,72,859/-
02.
Renting of Immovable Property Service
4,91,543/-
03.
Transport of Goods by Road Service
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e given while calculating the service tax liability under this category.
Regarding the demand of Service Tax under the Reverse Charge Mechanism for Transportation of Goods by Road, some of the consignments are covered vide Notification No.34/2004-ST dated 03/12/2004 which grants full exemption in the following two situations:-
(i) Where the gross amount charged on all consignments transported in a goods carriage does not exceed Rs. 1500/-.
(ii) Where the gross amount charged on “individual consignment” transported in a goods carriage does not exceed Rs. 750/-.
Further, abatement of 75% on freight paid was allowed in the Show Cause Notice. After calculating the Service liability under all the above categories and complying with the observations made by the Bench in the foregoing paragraphs, the demand may be communicated to the appellant assessee. Further, the amount of Rs. 13,87,701/- as paid by the appellant assessee should be appropriated against the demand, so calculated.
Howev
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =