Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 4]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

M/S Singh Transporters vs Cce, Raipur on 8 January, 2014

        

 
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

West Block No. 2, R.K. Puram, New Delhi  110 066.

Principal Bench, New Delhi



COURT NO. III



DATE OF HEARING  : 08/01/2014.

DATE OF DECISION : 08/01/2014.



Service Tax Appeal No. 772 and 774 of 2008 



[Arising out of the Order-in-Original No. Commissioner/RPR/67 & 66/2008 dated 14/08/2008 passed by The Commissioner Central Excise, Raipur.]



For Approval and signature :

Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) 

Honble Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical)

1.	Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see	:

	the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the

	CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?



2.	Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of 		:

	the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for 

	publication in any authoritative report or not?



3.	Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair		:

	copy of the order?



4.	Whether order is to be circulated to the 			:

	Department Authorities?

M/s Singh Transporters		]                                   Appellants

M/s Arunodaya Coal Agency	]



	Versus



CCE, Raipur                                                            Respondent

Appearance Shri B.L. Narasimhan, Advocate  for the appellant.

Mrs.Ranjana Jha, Authorized Representative (Jt. CDR)  for the Respondent.

CORAM : Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Honble Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) Final Order No. 50054-50055/2014 Dated : 08/01/2014 Per. Archana Wadhwa :-

Both the appeals are being disposed of by a single order as the issue involved is identical. Demand of service tax of Rs. 96,000/- and Rs. 11,000/- stand confirmed against the appellant on the ground that they have provided site formation and clearance services to South Eastern Coalfields Limited.

2. Learned advocate fairly agrees that the issue stand decided against them in the case of National Mining Co. Ltd. vs. CCE, Dibrugarh reported in 2008 (10) S.T.R. 136 (Tri.  Kolkata) and, as such, submits that he is not contesting the confirmation of demand of duties. However, he submits in the very said decision, the Tribunal has observed that keeping in view the disputed nature of services and interpretation of the scope of the service, it is a fit case to waive the penalty under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. He, accordingly, prays for setting aside the penalties upon both the appellants.

3. After hearing the learned Jt. CDR, we uphold the confirmation of demands and set aside the penalties in terms of the declaration of law in the case of National Mining Co. Ltd. vs. CCE, Dibrugarh referred (supra).

(Operative part of the order pronounced in the open court.) (Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) (Rakesh Kumar) Member (Technical) PK ??

??

??

??

2