Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Bangalore
Gac Shipping (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs The Commissioner Of Central Excise And ... on 22 October, 2007
Equivalent citations: [2008]12STJ248(CESTAT-BANGALORE)
ORDER T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)
1. The appeal and stay petition have been filed against Order-in- Original No. 8/2007/ST dated 10.05.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Cochin. Both the appeal and stay petition are taken up together for disposal.
2. In terms of the impugned order, the appellants are required to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 20,82,448/- towards Service Tax. Further, interest under Section 75 for the above amount which is not quantified has been imposed. Penalty of Rs 100/- per day under Section 76 and Rs 1000/- under Section 77 and Rs 20,82,448/- under Section 78 of the Finance Act 1994 have been imposed by the Commissioner. Further, penalty of Rs. 1,827/- under Rule 15 (4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 has also been imposed.
3. Shri Joseph & Kuriyan, learned advocate appeared on behalf of the appellants and Shri Anil Kumar, learned departmental representative for the Revenue.
4. We heard both sides. The main issue in this appeal relates to the service tax demanded by the Commissioner from the appellants in respect of the "other income" received by them. There is some violation of the Cenvat Credit Rules also. Therefore penal action has been taken in respect of certain irregular credits availed by the appellant. A similar matter with regard to the levy of service tax on "other income" in respect of the same appellant came up before this bench and the bench passed the Final Order No. 1210/2007 dated 25.10.2007 in which the entire issue has been remanded to the Original Authority. The appellants strongly challenged the imposition of service tax on "other income" which do not relate to the taxable service rendered by the appellant. In respect of certain reimbursable expenses the appellants had made profit. The Adjudicating Authority had held the view that the amount collected in excess of the actual expenditure should also be subjected to service tax. We have remanded the issue with our observations in the Final Order No. 1210/2007. In view of this we remand this appeal also to the Adjudicating Authority for a denovo decision in respect of the demands made towards payment of service tax. In the denovo order the Commissioner may also go into the submissions made in respect of the Cenvat credit issued. Therefore we leave all questions open and remand the matter to the Commissioner of Central Excise for a denovo decision on all points. The denovo order should be issued within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of this order.
(Pronounced and dictated in open Court)