Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Bharti Televentures Ltd vs Commissioner Of Service Tax on 7 June, 2012
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
Appeal No. ST/178/2007
[Arising out of Order-in-Original No.31/2007 to 36/2007 dt. 9.5.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai]
Bharti Televentures Ltd.
(Bharti Airtel Ltd)
Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Service Tax,
Chennai
Respondent
Appearance :
Shri S. Muthuvenkatraman, Advocate Ms. Indira Sisupal, JDR For the Appellant For the Respondent CORAM:
Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Honble Technical Member Mr. D.N. Panda, Honble Judicial Member Date of hearing : 7.6.2012 Date of decision : 7.6.2012 Final Order No.____________ Per D.N. Panda Ld. Counsel is fair to state that the appellant shall deposit the tax amount for the normal period since debatable issue of taxability of the SIM card sale and services involved therein could finally come to rest by apex courts judgement in Idea Mobile Communication Ltd. Vs CCE Cochin - 2011 (23) STR 433 (SC). He submits that in view of the bonafide belief by appellant as to no tax liability in view of different Judicial pronouncements on the subject during different periods, imposition of penalty on the appellant shall cause extreme hardship. That may be waived. He relies on the order passed by Tribunal in the case of Bharti Hexacom Ltd. Vs CCE Jaipur in service tax Appeal Nos.41 & 292 of 2006 disposed of vide Final Order in ST/A/161-162/12 dt. 24.2.12 to make such prayer.
2. There is no disagreement by the Revenue to the aforesaid proposition of the appellant.
3. In view of fair agreement by both sides, adjudication order is modified to give effect to the aforesaid proposal of both sides and levy of service tax for the normal period is confirmed annulling the demand relating to extended period of limitation. The demand for the normal period shall be followed by interest. Penalties shall not be exigible in view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case as has been held by Tribunal in the order cited by ld. Counsel and agreed by Revenue. Thus, appeal is partly allowed to the extend indicated above.
(reasons of the decision and the decision
pronounced in open court on 7.6.2012)
(D.N. PANDA) (DR. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY)
JUDICIAL MEMBER TECHNICAL MEMBER
gs
1
4
Appeal No.ST/178/2007
Appeal No.ST/178/2007