TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant is nothing but the manufacture of moulds and hence levy of service tax on such amount under the category of design services under Section 65(105)(zzzzd) of the Finance Act, 1994, is not justified. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - MA (EH)-75594/18 & S.T. Appeal No.76171/17 - FO/ST/A/75921/2018 & MO/75589/2018 - Dated:- 2-5-2018 - SHRI JUSTICE (DR.) SATISH CHANDRA, PRESIDENT And SHRI V. PADMANABHAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER Shri Ravi Raghavan, Advocate Shri H. Shukla, C.A. for the Appellant (s) Shri S. Mukhopadhyay, Supdt. (A.R.) for the Revenue(s) ORDER Per Shri V. Padmanabhan : For the reasons mentioned in the application, the early hearing is granted. With the consent of both sides, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... design charges are, in fact, paid to the appellants by customers towards the manufacture of the moulds and since these are liable to payment of excise duty, there is no justification to demand of service tax. 6. On the other hand, the ld.D.R. for the Revenue, justified the impugned order. He explains that the charges paid to the appellant by the customer, are towards the design of the moulds and the customer in fact supplied drawing and the appellant is expected to use it in the design of such moulds and such charges are liable to service tax under design services. 6. After hearing both sides and carefully perusing the record, we find that the appellant has been supplied the design and drawings and were paid certain amount towards pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny manner to a client in one or more disciplines of engineering. No doubt, that the appellant in their balance sheet treated this amount as design and development charges. However, from the facts of the case, we find that the appellants were charging for the design and development of tooling, which were used in the manufacture of the rubber components of the motor vehicle. The rubber components so manufactured were cleared on the payment of excise duty and the value of rubber components are also included to the cost of these tooling. In these circumstances, we find that the demand confirming in respect of service tax treating the appellant as consulting engineering is not sustainable and set aside the impugned order. The appeal is allowed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
