TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mber (T) and Shri D.N. Panda, Member (J) Dr. Gautam Ray, Jt. CDR, for the Appellant. Shri Anjan Sarkar , C.A. , for the Respondent. [Order per: Chittaranjan Satapathy, Member (T)]. - Heard both sides. 2. These two Appeals filed respectively by the assessee-appellant and the Department are against the same impugned Order passed by the Adjudicating Commissioner and hence, both these Appeals are taken together for hearing and decision. Service Tax Appeal No. 118/08 3. This Appeal has been filed by the Department pursuant to a Review Order passed by a Committee consisting of Shri Amar Singh and Shri P.N. Vittal Dass. Shri Singh has signed the Review Order as Chief Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Ranc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inted by a Notification in the Official Gazette he cannot be deemed to have been vested with the statutory powers to act as a Chief Commissioner of Central Excise under the Central Excise Law. Consequently, such a person cannot also exercise the powers under the Finance Act, 1994 dealing in Service Tax matters, as such powers are exercisable only by a person appointed as Chief Commissioner of Central Excise in the manner known to the law. In the present case, we have been shown only Office Order No. 186/2007 dated 26-7-07 in respect of Shri Amar Singh and Office Order No. 85/08 dated 29-4-08 in respect of Shri P.N. Vittal Dass; but the Department has not produced any Notification published in the Official Gazette appointing either of them a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urisdiction is legal and proper and requires no interference by this Tribunal. However, we express no opinion in regard to these submissions as we have held that the Appeal is not maintainable and we are not going into the merits of the Appeal. Service Tax Appeal No. 117/08 5. This Appeal has been filed by the appellant-assessee in respect of the demand confirmed by the Adjudicating Commissioner in respect of the services rendered in Jamshedpur jurisdiction. Shri Anjan Sarkar, learned CA appearing for the appellant-assessee states that the Appellants have paid the Service Tax payable on the gross value of the services provided by them and that the demand confirmed under the impugned Order relates to the additional demand which is pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid the correct amount of Service Tax on the gross value of services realised through their bills. We also find that the Department's case is entirely based on the Segment Report and the Profit and Loss Account, and there is no indication that there is any non-payment of Service Tax attributable to any particular bill or receipt. Moreover, we find that in paragraph 12 of the impugned Order, the Adjudicating Commissioner has recorded that the argument of the Appellants that the bill raised and reflected in the Segment Report cannot be the same is not understandable. We are of the view that to reconcile the views of the Department and the Appellants in this case in relation to the discrepancy between the tax liability arrived from the Segment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
