TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 532X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es and Commercial or Industrial Construction Services have been provided by the appellant. On perusal of the annexure to the show cause notice, it is seen that there is nothing mentioned as to the category of service. The annexure merely states the description of work done in the invoices. The adjudicating authority, while confirming the demand, has not made any discussion as to what is the amount that would fall under each category of service or whether the entire amount falls within one category of service. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. M/S Brindavan Beverages (P) Ltd. [ 2007 (6) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT] has observed that the show cause notice, being the foundation of litigation, has to contain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments were made to appellant under services mainly falling under the category of Management, Maintenance or Repair Services, Manpower supply Agency Services and Commercial or Industrial construction services which became taxable service with effect from 01.07.2003, 16.06.2005 and 10.09.2004. It appeared that, though the appellant had provided taxable services and received payment from M/s Neyveli Lignite Corporation, they had not discharged the service tax to the amount of Rs.13,75,856/- received from M/s Neyveli Lignite Corporation. The appellant was thus liable to pay service tax on the tune of Rs.1,70,056/- along with interest. Show cause notice dated 14.10.2009 was issued to the appellant proposing to demand the service tax along with i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ck of details of the allegations, the same stands vitiated. 3. The Ld. Counsel pointed out that in similar cases, the appeal filed by the department, wherein the department contested that even if the category of the service is not specified in the show cause notice, the demand should sustain, the Tribunal vide order reported in 2017 (6) TMI 57 (CESTAT Chennai) in the case of CCE ST Pondicherry Vs. A.M. Manickam had held that the demand cannot sustain when the show cause notice lacks the details of the category of service under which the department proposes to demand the service. It is submitted that the appellant had provided various services to M/s Neyveli Lignite Corporation. The demand has been raised on the basis of invoices and nothing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and, has not made any discussion as to what is the amount that would fall under each category of service or whether the entire amount falls within one category of service. 8. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Vs. M/S Brindavan Beverages (P) Ltd., 2007 (213) ELT 487 (S.C.) has observed that the show cause notice, being the foundation of litigation, has to contain the necessary details so as inform the assessee to defend the allegations. In the case of CCE ST Pondicherry Vs. A.M. Manickam (supra) 2017 (6) TMI 57 ( CESTAT Chennai ) , the Tribunal had occasion to consider the demand of service tax on show cause notices issued to various persons who had provided services to M/s Neyveli Lignite Corporation. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
