The petitioner is a registered partnership firm engaged in rendering various services outsourced by the 1st respondent. The petitioner has been carrying on various cargo handling services as per the work awarded by the 1st respondent. With respect to certain items of work handled by the petitioner which are indicated hereunder as 1 to 8 the petitioner contended that they are not liable to pay service tax since those are not exigible to tax as per Finance Act, 1994. The disputed services were:- 1. Receipt & Stacking Operations-SMKT001
2. Loading to Trucks-SMKT002
3. Loading to Rail Wagons-SMKT003
4. Loading to Containers-SMKT004
5. Shifting Newsprint reels-SMKT005
6. Re-stacking of Reels-SMKT006 WPC No.17684/2013 ::2::
7. Manual Packing-SMKT007
8. Manual Re-packing-SMKT008
2. With respect to three of the services, being Item No. 2, 7 and 8, the 4th respondent allowed the plea that the same is not exigible to service tax. However, with respect to the balance services, the 4th respondent passed an Assessment Order levying tax on the petitioner. Admittedly, the same is pending consideration before the first appellate authority.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner directing reimbursement of the service tax which is legally due to the petitioner as per Exts.P1 and P2 work order. The petitioner also relies upon a judgment in W.P(C)12851/2013 dated 14.08.2013, wherein a learned Single Judge had directed reimbursement of service tax from an authority coming under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Looking at the recital of facts contained in WPC No.17684/2013 ::3::
the aforesaid judgment, the authority legally bound to reimburse the service tax was directed to do. The essential differences between the aforesaid decision and the writ petition before me is that in the present case, no tax has been paid by the petitioner as on today. The petitioner's claim is pending in appeal and the petitioner has not effected payment till date. It may not be proper for this Court to adjudicate upon the agreement at this stage, especially when the petitioner does not have any cause of action to claim reimbursement of service tax from the first respondent at this point of time.
Leaving open the contentions of the parties, the writ petition stands closed. No costs.
Sd/-
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to judge