Mirc Electronics Ltd. vs Cce Thane I on 20 December, 2018
4. According to Learned Counsel for appellant, it was only by an
amendment, effective from 1st April 2011, that 'trading' was included
in the definition of 'exempted service' and that, till then, it was not
even considered to be a service let alone acknowledged as exempt.
Contending that it was not possible, at the time of procurement, to
E/724/2010
4
isolate the portion of service utilized toward trading, and the system
relied upon could, conceivably, have blemishes, the ingredients
precedent for invoking the penal provisions in Central Excise Act,
1944 are claimed to be absent for which Learned Counsel places
reliance upon the decision of the Tribunal in Commissioner of Service
Tax, New Delhi v. AVL India Pvt Ltd [2017 (4) GSTL 59 (Tri-Del)], in
Gujarat Boron Derivatives P Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise,
Customs & Service Tax (A), Vadodara-II [2017 (348) ELT 105 (Tri-
Ahmd)] and in Commissioner of Central Excise, Ghaziabad v. Avon
International Pvt Ltd [2017 (5) GSTL 376 (Tri-All)] as precedents in
which penalty was not imposed in these very same circumstances.