TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce tax w.e.f. 16/06/2005 - appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. - ST/44/2007-DB - Final Order No. 20604/2017 - Dated:- 2-5-2017 - Shri S.S Garg, Judicial Member and Shri V. Padmanabhan, Technical Member Shri Suresh Kumar, Chartered Accountant for the appellant. Shri Pakshi Rajan, Asst. Commissioner(AR) for the respondent. ORDER Per : V. PADMANABHAN The appeal is against the Order-in-Original No.62/2006 dt. 27/10/2005 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore. The appellant holds service tax registration under the category of real estate agency . On scrutiny of records by the audit wing of the Commissionerate, Revenue formed an opinion that the appellant is providing the service u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant has started payment of service tax under the said category without murmur. However it is his submission that the Department has unfairly culled out a part of the consideration received by them and attributed it to the performance of security services and raised the impugned demand. He submitted that it is settled law that when a new service is brought on the statute, services covered therein cannot be levied to service tax under any other earlier categories for the prior period. He specifically placed reliance on several case laws to buttress the above argument. He relied upon the following case laws:- i. Chennai Telephones (BSNL) Vs. CCE, Chennai [2004-TIOL-53-CESTAT-MAD] ii. CCE, Chennai Vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Consultancy Service but comes under the category of Manpower Supply Agency Service which came under tax net effective from 16/06/2005. Since the period involved in the present case is from October, 1998 to January 2002, much prior to the introduction of levy on Manpower Supply or Recruitment Agency Service the demand raised in the impugned order does not sustain. Accordingly, we allow the appeal. We find that similar view has been consistently taken by this Tribunal and higher appellate fora. 6. In view of the above, we find no justification for the demand of service tax for the period October 2000 to June 2005 which is prior to the date of introduction of new service tax levy under the category of maintenance or managemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
