2019 (7) TMI 210

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ering etc. which the Department alleged to fall under the category of 'Consulting Engineer' services. Consequently, a Show Cause Notice was issued on 14.10.2002 for recovery of the Service Tax not paid during the period 1997-98 to 2000-2001 amounting to Rs. 15,94,80,750/- which has been proposed to be recovered along with interest and penalty. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed with interest and penalty. Hence, the present appeal. 3. At the outset, the learned Advocate Shri Gajendra Jain for the Appellant submits that during the relevant period, 1997-98 to 2000- 01, the Appellant has rendered services which are in the nature of erection, commissioning, inspection, maintenance support services etc of DG sets sold to various customer .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ribunal in the case of Power Grid Corporation of India Vs CCE Patna - 2018-TIOL-2815-CESTAT-Kol following the ratio of Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of M.N. Dastur & Co. Vs UoI - 2005-TIOL-187-HC-KOL-ST and other judgments on the subject, interpreting the scope of 'firm' mentioned in the definition of 'consulting engineer' service came to the conclusion that service tax is leviable on 'consulting engineer' service, even if it is rendered by a corporate body. Further, he has submitted that inspite of repeated requests made by the Department to the Appellant for supply of copies of the agreement entered with respective clients, but they failed to submit the same. Accordingly, the case was decided by the Adjudicating authority on the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... finition of 'consulting engineer' service is applicable only to a non-corporate body. On the other hand, the contention of the Revenue is that inspite of repeated requests, as noticed by the learned Commissioner, in Para 16 of the impugned order, copies of agreement have never been produced before the Adjudicating authority in response to the request of the Department. Therefore, the Adjudicating authority could not analyse these agreements and arrive at the finding that the services rendered by the Appellant would fall under the scope of 'consulting engineer' service or otherwise. 7. We find force in the contention of the learned A.R. for the Revenue, inasmuch the relevant service agreements with respective customers/clients have not bee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X