9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr. Sahab Singh, J. Shri V.K. Singh, Authorised Representative (SDR), for appellant This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise against order-in-appeal No. PII/PAP/216/2009 dated 22.10.2009. 2. The brief facts of the case are that a show cause notice was issued to M/s. Tambe Engineering and Fabricators (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) for non-payment of service tax on maintenance and repairs services provided by them to M/s. Dow Agro Science Pvt. Ltd. The show cause notice was confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise vide order-in-original dated 28th September 2007, in which the service tax amount of Rs.1,28,230/- along with interest was confirmed on the respondent and penalty under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of service tax. iv. Show Cause Notice is issued u/s 68 and not under Section 73(1) of the Act but the same is confirmed u/s 73(2) of the Act which is beyond the scope of SCN. v. The Adjudicating Authority has imposed penalties simultaneously u/s 76 and 78, which is against the spirit of statutory provision in view of the 5th proviso to Section 78. vi. The demand is time barred inasmuch as the audit of M/s. Dow Agro Sciences was carried out in April 2006 and Show Cause Notice issued on 23.03.2007, therefore, from April 2006 onwards only the normal period of one year is available to issue demand notice. The order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was not accepted by the department and the Revenue has filed this appeal agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome fabrication work may fall under manufacturing activity which needs to be arrived at by the original authority. The learned SDR further contended that in work contract orders, in majority of the cases M/s. Dow Agro Sciences Ltd. have shown the service tax payable if the service provider is registered. He argued that there was a value-based exemption available during the financial years 2003-04 and 2004-05 and the value of taxable services provided by the respondent was more than Rs.4 lakhs during the years 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07 and as a result, the assessee was not entitled for small scale exemption of Rs.4 lakhs during the period. He further submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not appreciated that there were some disput ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
