2019 (4) TMI 2165

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lant : Shri Sachin Chitnis, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Onil Shivadikar, Authorized Representative ORDET PER: S.K. MOHANTY This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 18.02.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Aurangabad. 2. The short question involved in this appeal for consideration by the Tribunal is, as to whether, remuneration pa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o his employment from the purview of such definition. On perusal of the case records, we find that the whole time directors were appointed by the appellant on payment of salary as remuneration and for that purpose, the appellant as the employer has issued Form No. 16 to the whole time directors, by deducting the tax at source. Further, the income tax returns filed by the whole time directors also .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal, holding that when the remuneration is paid to the Directors as salary for performing the day-to-day activities, there is no involvement of any taxable service for levy of service tax. 5. In view of above, we do not find any merits in the impugned order passed by the Learned adjudicating authority. Accordingly, after setting aside the same, the appeal is allowed in favour of the appellant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X