Case Law Details
Bharat Electronics Limited Vs Commissioner of G.S.T. and Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)
CESTAT Chennai held that invocation of extended period of limitation unjustified as issue was mired in litigation and interpretation of law. Further, appellant is public sector undertaking and hence there is no scope of suppression with an intention to evade tax.
Facts- During the audit of accounts of the assessee, it appeared to the Revenue that the appellant had received service charges from Heavy Vehicle Factory (HVF), Avadi for overhauling of parts of gun control stabilizer, for which appropriate Service Tax under Repair and Maintenance service carried out by them had not been paid.
Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued proposing demand of Service tax on the amounts received towards Repair and Maintenance service for the period from 2010-11 to 2014-15 and on the amounts received towards liquidated damages for the period from 2012-13 to 2014-15, apart from appropriate interest u/s. 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 and penalty u/s. 76, 77 and 78.
Conclusion- Here, admittedly, the alleged services of the appellant are provided to the Government, by way of repair / maintenance or alteration of of original works, but the same are definitely not consumed in a commerce, industry or any other business or profession, but exclusively for the Ministry of Defence and hence, we are prima facie satisfied that the scope of the alleged services gets covered under Sl. No. 12(a) ibid. itself.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
