TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e period of one year – Demand not sustainable - ST/38/2006 - 1065/2006 - Dated:- 19-6-2006 - [Order]- This appeal arises from OIO No. 4/05 dated 15-11-05 confirming demands of Service Tax and imposing penalties. the appellants had rendered consultancy engineering services to their clients M/s. B.S. Refrigerators and M/s. B.S Appliances. They have raised debit notes for the value of services i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the disputed period 2002 is barred by time. They had referred to returns filed in April 2003. They also relied on the judgment of the Tribunal rendered in the case of Anand Nishikawa Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut, 2005 (188) E.L.T. 149 (S.C.) wherein it has been clearly laid down by the Apex Court that when the facts are not suppressed then the demands would be barred by time. 2. We have heard both ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es not permit recovery of the tax unless the payments are received. Both the Section 68 and Rule 6(1) are reproduced here below:- Section 68. Payment of service tax - (1) Every person providing taxable service to any person shall pay service tax at the rate specified in Section 66 in such manner and within such period as may be prescribed. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir customers in terms of Section 68 arid Rule 6(1) of Service Tax Rules The service tax is not liable to be paid as the assessee has not received the payment towards the value of taxable service. The appellants have been filing returns and informing the department about the non-receipt of the value of services rendered by their customers and about the nonpayment of the same. The department is aw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
