9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... associated enterprise in the books of accounts on 10.5.2008. The various charges which are under dispute and the payment of service tax under reverse charge mechanism has been demanded are as under:- (a) Salaries paid to foreign service engineers (b) Fees for technical know-how (c) Fee for product testing / product validation (d) Reimbursement of air travel expenses (e) Service charges for loan guarantee As per the reply given by the appellant, the Commissioner of Service Tax vide Order in Original No. 48/2012 dated 29.2.2012 has confirmed the demand of Rs.2,63,60,667/- along with interest and penalties. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant is before us. 2. No cross-objections have been filed by the respondent. 3. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dia shall not be treated as output service for the purpose of availment of CENVAT credit under Cenvat credit rules, 2004. 7. Exchange rate fluctuation 2,492/- - 4. We have heard Shri Raghavan Ramabhadran, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt. K. Komathi, ADC (AR) for the Department. 5. The appellant has stated that the department has failed to mention and classify the service it seeks to propose and demand service tax in the Show Cause Notice. Hence the Order in Original is beyond the scope of the Show Cause Notice and on this ground itself, the entire demand needs to be set aside. Further, since the issue involved is of pure interpretation of legal provisions and levy of service tax under reverse charge mechanism, as to whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by their associated enterprise and other remittances by the appellant. We have examined the primary objection raised by the appellant that the show cause notice does not disclose the classification of the service it seeks to demand service tax on. We find that this plea of the appellant is not disputed. However, its Revenue's submission that mere non-quoting of the category does not vitiate the proceedings in the matter. She relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Geeedeelon Texo Twist Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2009 (238) ELT 455 (Tri. Ahmd.). The case relates to imported Polyester Filament Yarns found in excess in the factory compared to the last stock balance recorded in the statutory records, where the appellant unit admitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Tribunal in CCE, Pondicherry vs R Sundaramurthy & Co [2019 (5) TMI 228-CESTAT Chennai], a SCN which does not specify the category of service under which it seeks to impose Service Tax is illegal and the Service Tax demand cannot be sustained. Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Brindavan Beverages Ltd [2007 (13) ELT 487 (SC)] has held that the SCN is the foundation on which the department has to build its case and if allegations in the notice are not specific, lack detail etc it would be sufficient to hold that the notice was not given proper opportunity to meet the allegations. We concur with the view and hold that the demand for service tax under RCM must fail on the grounds of natural just ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... harge basis GTA (Goods Transport Agency). The above decision of Gujrat, Delhi and Punjab High Courts were also followed by us in Commissioner of CGST and General Excise, Belapur Commissionerate vs. M/s. GTL Infrastructure Limited in (Central Excise Appeal No. 94 of 2019) decided on 25th June, 2019 in respect of discharge of service tax obligation on reverse charge basis on import of services under Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 by utilization of cenvat credit. Thus there is no reason not to follow our Court's decision in GTL Infrastructure Limited (supra). 7. On the above being pointed out, the distinction which is sought to be made out by the Revenue before us for not following Vishal Parekar the earlier decisions, is, the proh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity of a subject to tax one must have regard to the strict letter of the law. If the revenue satisfies the court that the case falls strictly within the provisions of the law, the subject can be taxed. If, on the other hand, the case of not covered within the four corners of the provisions of the taxing statue, no tax can be imposed by inference or by analogy or by trying to probe into the intentions of the Legislature and by considering what was the substance of the matter." The Apex Court had held that the provisions of a taxing statute must be construed as they stand, adopting the plain and grammatical meaning of the words used. In the present case there was no express provision under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 restricting the usage ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
