9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cryptic manner and without application of mind. 2. After hearing both sides, we find that appellant is registered with the Service Tax department with effect from in or around 2009 for providing service of tangible goods. Said services become taxable with effect from 16.5.08. As the appellant was providing said services to M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd., Revenue sought figures of payment to the present appellant from M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd. as reflected in their book of account. It was found that M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd. has made a payment of Rs. l,10,56,813/- to the appellant between the period 1.4.2005 till March, 2010. 3. As the above receipts from M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd. were not reflected as value of service by the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntest the SCN on the merit, ....." From the above, it is apparent that the appellants had not contested the merits of the case and accordingly, there is no dispute regarding providing of services and receipt of value of taxable service. ............. 9. In view of aforesaid observations, I find that the adjudicating authority has correctly confirmed the demand of Service Tax. The order-in-original cannot, therefore, be faulted. I, therefore, see no reason to interfere with this order and refuse to allow the appeal. Appeal is rejected. " 6. As can be seen from the above reproduced portion, Commissioner (Appeals) has not dealt with various pleas raised by the appellant and has simply observed that the adjudicating authority has gone throu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal, it comes out clear that the appellate authority has only reproduced a part of said paragraphs, leaving out the balance lines. As such, the entire colour of the submissions made by the appellant got changed. Reading of para 6 as reproduced above, clearly reflects upon the appellants stand that they are submitting that said amount pertained to supply of tangible goods which was not taxable prior to 16.5.08. Similarly, para 8 as reproduced above, brings out clearly the appellants stand that they are not contesting the SCN as regards the defence pertained to non-mentioning of the classification of service. For the reasons best known to Commissioner (Appeals), he has chosen to reproduce only a part of the said paragraphs speaking in bet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
