9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bilaspur and it is on record that the respondent had taken service tax registration from Chind-wan Division, of Bhopal Commissionerate in March, 2006. If that be so, a show cause notice dated 13-10-2006 issued by the Guntur Cominissionerate for the demand of service tax on services rendered at Chindwan Division, of Bhopal Commissionerate cannot be held as correct in law and to proceed against the respondents for the violation, if any. We are convinced that there is no jurisdiction of the Guntur Commissionerate to proceed against the respondents’ default, if any, at other Commissionerate. Accordingly, in view of these findings, we hold that the impugned order setting aside demand relying on tribunal’s decision in Ores India Ltd v. CCE – [200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess for the period 16-6-2005 to 31-12-2006 for the amounts received from M/s. Malanjkhand Copper Mines. However, they have not paid the total service Tax due and the interest payable on the tax paid by them. They have only taken registration at the above Office for the services provided in that area and not the centralized Registration. The SCN demanding differential duty and interest payable is being issued separately by the jurisdictional Bhopal Commissionerate in respect of the services provided to M/s. Malanjkhand Copper Mines. Integral Construction Company, Vijayawada are providing taxable services of site formation and clearance, excavation and earth moving and demolition to M/s. South Eastern Coal Fields and are liable to payment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of Ores India Ltd v. CCE - 2008 (9) S.T.R. 157 (Tri.- Kol.) and also the Board Circular No. 75/05/2004-ST. dated 3-3-04. 6. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. In this case it is undisputed that the respondents are providing services of 'site formation and clearance, excavations, earthmoving and demolition services'. At the same time it is also undisputed that appellants are doing this activity at Bilaspur, Madhya Pradesh. The only reason for confirmation of demand by the adjudicating authority was on the fact that respondents had a centralized billing system at Vijayawada which is falling within the jurisdiction of Guntur Commissionerate. We find that learned Commissioner (Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h law as has been laid down by this Tribunal in the case of Ores India Pvt. Ltd. (supra). We also find strong force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel that the Board Circular dated 3-3-04 settles the issue in favour of respondent. We may read relevant portion of circular. "In view of the above, the matter of power of adjudication of officers of Central Excise in relation to Service Tax Rules, 1994 was re-examined and it has now been decided by the Board that adjudication of all the cases relating to Service tax may be carried out only by the jurisdictional ACs/DCs of the Central Excise as per Section 73 of the Finacne Act, 1994." In this case, the activity of rendering services was done at Bilaspur and it is on record that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
