TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1083X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limitation - the whole of the demand is barred by limitation. The impugned order is set aside - appeal allowed. - MR. ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. K. ANPAZHAKAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Ms. Shreya Mundhra, Advocate for the Appellant Shri P.K. Ghosh, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER Both the appeals are having a common issue, therefore, both are disposed off by a common order. 2. The facts of the case are that the Appellant is engaged, inter-alia, in providing services as a Management Consultant. It provides a comprehensive range of services such as data collection and analysis, manpower mobilization, liaison, training supervision, management consulting, software development etc. Apart from above, services are provided by the Appellant under a consortium arrangement in the capacity of sub-contractor. The Appellant had admittedly obtained Service tax registration on August 17, 2001 and has been duly discharging its Service tax liability, as applicable. 2.1 The impugned proceedings were initiated alleging wilful misstatement and suppression of facts etc. with intent to evade payment of tax by invoking extended period of limit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Nizam Sugar Vs. Collector of Central Excise, A.P. reported in 2006 (197) ELT 465 (SC). Therefore, the impugned orders are to be set aside. 4. The ld.A.R. for the Revenue, reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5. We find that this issue for the earlier period has been examined in detail by this Tribunal, wherein this Tribunal has held as under : 11. For the period 2004-05, the Appellant has received income under four different heads as mentioned above. The liability of service tax on the categories mentioned above are discussed as below: (i) Consulting fee (other than Management consulting) Rs5,67,322/- The Appellant stated that they provide a comprehensive range of services such as data collection and analysis, manpower mobilization, liaison, training supervision in addition to management consulting. These activities are not liable to be classified under Management Consultancy Service . The impugned order has classified the entire activity under management consultancy and demanded service tax. To levy of Service tax under Management Consultancy service as defined in Section 65(105)(r) read with Section 65(65) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Appellant is outside the ambit of Section 65(105)(r) of the Act. In this regard they placed their reliance on the decision of the Hon ble CESTAT in the case of Indfos Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner 2012 (26) STR 129 (Tri.-Del)as affirmed in 2015 (40) S.T.R. 220 (All.), the relevant para of the decision is reproduced below: 14 . Now the argument that they were not the main contractors but were only sub-contractors needs to be examined. This issue whether sub-contractor needs to pay service tax has arisen because of certain clarifications issued by the Board in the early stage of evolution of service tax levy and connected laws. These instructions were issued in view of different factors like, (i) Even prior to the introduction of Cenvat Scheme for service tax, the policy of the government was to tax the same service only once, that is in the hands of the main person providing the service. There was no intention to tax the same value twice in the hands of two different parties rendering different part of the same service. This situation is most aptly demonstrated by the service rendered by a stock broker and that rendered by a sub-broker to a broker. Sub-broker rece ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egal position that no sub-contractor is liable to pay service tax on any taxable activity. 15 . The liability to tax has to be decided with reference to the definition the concerned taxable service at the relevant period of time and the activities carried out and the contract governing such activity. Some of the case laws quoted do not discuss any provision of any statute to come to the conclusion that there shall be no levy of service tax on sub-contractors. In fact the decision in Semac Pvt. Ltd v. CST - 2006 (4) S.T.R. 475 (Tri.-Bang.) is given considering that the main contractor had paid tax for the full value. However the policy that if the main contractor has paid service tax, the sub-contractor need not pay tax again on the same service, for periods prior to introduction of Cenvat Scheme is reasonable and acceptable based on the Board s Circulars, for maintaining equality before law. In this case no argument is raised that the main contractor namely, HAL has discharged service tax liability. But if evidence is produced to that effect the demand on the sub-contractor is not maintainable. 16 . The argument that they can claim an exemption at any stage of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
