Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (11) TMI 490 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (11) TMI 490 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Taxability - installation and commissioning charges - repair and maintenance of the equipments - training of staff of the customers - Revenue has sought to recover the service tax on such activities for the period prior to 01.07.2003 by taking the view that such services would stand covered by the taxable services of Consulting Engineer for the period upto 30.06.2003. With effect from 01.07.2003, service tax already stands discharged by the appellant. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing Engineer service. - Payment of service tax for a portion of the taxable value received by the appellant - service tax paid by HO - Held that: - Ld. Counsel for the appellant has contended that they are in a position to submit the proof of such payment once again before the original authority. Ld. Departmental Representative submits that even though copies of some challans are available on the record of the appeal, it is not possible to correlate such challans with the service tax demand. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0-CU[DB] - Final Order No. 54917/2016 - Dated:- 8-11-2016 - Mr. S. K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) And Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Mr. R.C. Chaudhary, Advocate For Appellant Ms. Neha Garg, DR For Respondent ORDER Per Mr. V. Padmanabhan The present appeal has been directed against the Order-in-Original dated 10.06.2010 passed by CST, Delhi. 2. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of pollution control equipments falling under Chapter Heading 90 of the First Schedule to the Central .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ree categories stated above. They also noticed that service tax was not paid on the value received by the appellant pertaining to marketing, technical and other services. Show Cause Notice was issued on 24.08.2007 proposing demand of service tax to the extent of ₹ 13,18,795/- on account of provision of taxable services during the period 2002-03 to 2004-05. The original adjudicating authority (Addl. Commissioner) vide his order dated 11.06.2008 dropped the proceedings against the appellant. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ere included in the statute books for payment of service tax with effect from 01.07.2003. The Department has proposed to charge service tax on the value received for the above activities for the period prior to 01.07.2003 by taking the view that they are covered under the category of Consulting Engineer service, by relying upon the Boards Circular No.49/11/2002-ST, dated 18.12.2002. (ii) Ld. Advocate further submits that the above circular stands subsequently modified vide Circular No.79/9/2004- .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

details of payment of such service tax was brought to the notice of the original adjudicating authority based on which the demand was dropped by him. However, ld. Commissioner, while passing the impugned order has upheld the demand by holding the view that the appellant has failed to substantiate their claim of payment of service tax by their head office with documentary proof. They further submit that the ld. Commissioner has not referred to the original documents submitted by them and also did .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

od by including them under Consulting Engineer service. To his support, he relied on the following case laws:- (i) Emco Ltd. Vs. CCE, Mumbai [2011 (33) STT 51/13 TAXMANN.COM 109 (Mumb-CESTAT)] (ii) CCE, Bangalore Vs. Yokogawa Blue Star Ltd. [2010 (29) STT 402/8 TAXMANN.COM 29 (Bang.-CESTAT]\ (iii) Emerson Network Power (I) Vs. CCE [2007 (10) STT 92 (Mum-CESTAT)] 5. Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that even though the installation, repair and maintenance and commercial training were inc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

already been paid by the head office of the assessee. However, they failed to produce the documentary proof and get their claim substantiated before the Commissioner. 6. The undisputed fact is that the appellant has carried out, after clearance of pollution control equipments from their factory, the erection, commissioning and installation of such equipments at the customers premises. They have also carried out repair and maintenance activities of such equipments as well as undertaken training o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ey have submitted the proof before the ld. Commissioner to substantiate their claim that service tax has been paid by their head office. Such claim, even though was allowed by the Addl. Commissioner in the original proceedings, but stands disallowed by the commissioner in the impugned order. 7. It is settled law that when a new entry has been introduced in the service tax net from a particular date, the same activities cannot be levied to service tax for the prior period under different entry. I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version