Order Date – 06 November 2023

Parties: State Charges Gog Jafrabad Port Vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Bhavnagar

Facts –

• The Appellant, State Charges Gog Jafrabad Port, have been regularly paying Service tax on the taxable amount received by them from M/s. GPPL, Pipavav towards water front royalty/ wharfage charges.
• It was observed by the department that the appellant had paid since April 2010, but the appellant have not paid the Service Tax on the taxable am.ount received by them during the period from 2006-07 to 2009-10.
• Accordingly, a SCN dated 21 October, 2011 issued invoking the extended time proviso for demand of the duty. Interest and penal provisions have also be invoked. The learned Adjudicating Authority has confirmed all the charges as invoked in the SCN.

Issue –

• Whether the appellant is requied to pay service tax for the period from 2006-07 to 2009-10?

Order –

• The Tribunal observed that the appellants are not providing any service to M/s. Gujarat Pipavav Port Ltd with regard to a vessel or goods rather it is a fee which is being charged to allowing him to operate port facilities of the minor port. Therefore actual service with regard to a vessel or goods are being provided by M/s. Gujarat Pipavav Port Ltd at the minor port not by the appellant.
• Further from Board Circular No. 89/7/2006-ST dated 18.12.2006 as well as Circular dated 23.08.2007, it is clear that water front royalty is being charged from 1 April 2008 as per the provisions of the Maritime Board Act, 1981 per Section 22A, and therefore the maritime board is collecting the water front royalty as a statutory levy provided by Maritime Board Act, 1981, on behalf of State of Gujarat.
• Similar matter has already been decided by this Tribunal in the appellant’s own case of Gujarat Maritime Board Vs.Commr. C.E reported under 2015 (38) STR 776 (Tri.-Ahmd) in which it was held that “w.e.f. 1-4-2008, the govt. of gujarat has amended the gujarat maritime board act, 1981, wherein section 22a has been inserted the said section 22a specifically states that any amount provided by gujarat maritime board, the appellant herein, is a state levy and a statutory levy and proceeds of such levy are credited to the consolidated treasury fund of state of gujarat. if that be so, any amount collected after 1-4-2008 by gujarat maritime board, can be considered as statutory levy only and service tax liability thereon may not arise.
• Hence it was held that the impugned order-in-original is without any merit and appeal is allowed.