2018 (5) TMI 826 - AT - Service Tax

Demand of service tax - management maintenance & repair service - manpower recruitment and supply agency service - cleaning activity - Held that - the authorities below have not properly addressed the issue as to under which category of taxable service, the activities provided by the appellant should fall - the Service Tax liability has not been properly quantified with regard to the specific heads of service. The proceedings initiated by the Department cannot be sustained at this juncture, for proper consideration of the facts - the matter should go back to the original authority for passing of fresh adjudication order, by addressing the issues - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against Service Tax demand confirmed by Commissioner (Appeals) - Proper bifurcation of services provided by the appellant - Ex-parte order passed against the appellant - Quantification of Service Tax liability - Nature of activities provided by the appellant under taxable services - Need for fresh adjudication order.

Analysis:
The appellant, a joint venture company, provides various services falling under different taxable service categories to M/s. NTPC. The Department sought recovery of Service Tax demand for the services provided during the disputed period. The show cause notice lacked proper bifurcation of services and quantification of Service Tax liability for specific categories. The appellant contended that the orders passed against them were ex-parte and lacked merit. The ld. Consultant argued that the show cause notice and orders cannot be sustained on merits due to improper consideration of submissions.

The Revenue, represented by the ld. DR, reiterated the findings in the impugned order. Upon hearing both sides and examining the records, it was observed that the show cause notice did not categorize the services provided by the appellant accurately. The authorities failed to address the categorization of services and quantify the Service Tax liability for specific heads of service properly. The ex-parte order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) without considering the appellant's submissions in the right perspective was deemed unsustainable.

Therefore, the Appellate Tribunal concluded that the proceedings initiated by the Department could not be sustained at that point. The matter was remanded to the original authority for the issuance of a fresh adjudication order. The adjudicating authority was directed to address the nature of activities provided by the appellant, categorize them under respective heads of taxable services, quantify the demand for individual service heads, and consider the appellant's entitlement to exemptions and deductions. The appellant was to be granted a personal hearing before a decision was made on the issue afresh.

In the end, the appeal was allowed by way of remand to the original authority for proper consideration and fresh adjudication order.