9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant for providing output services to appellants customers, it is obviously an input service as per definition at Rule 2 (l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Therefore the appellant is entitled to take Cenvat credit on such services. In favour of assessee. Demand of Service Tax on account of common recharge facility with M/s.Aircel Ltd., Coimbatore & Demand of Service Tax under reverse charge on amounts paid to foreign telecom companies for international outbound roaming service - Held that:- Remand the matter to the respondent-Commissioner i.e. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai who has already examined similar matter to give a detailed finding whether the issue involved in this appeal is in any way different from the one already ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f common recharge facility with M/s.Aircel Ltd., Coimbatore. 4,16,47,154/- June 07 to Dec 08 (3) Demand of Service Tax under reverse charge on amounts paid to foreign telecom companies for international outbound roaming service 1,49,95,135/- April 08 to Dec 08 (4) Reversal of Cenvat credit on removal used capital goods 56,875/- April 07 to March 08 On the first issue, the counsel for appellant submits that the appellant is a mobile telecom operator licensed to operate in Chennai. They take the services of M/s.BSNL for connecting their customers to other persons who are located in areas serviced by the landlines of BSNL. BSNL bills charges a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther Telecom Circle as far as the mobile services are concerned. There have been occasions, when the appellant sold SIM cards and recharge coupons of Aircel Ltd., Coimbatore. On such sales, the service tax is paid on the cards and re-charge coupons by Aircel Ltd. Before release through the appellant or its dealers. He contests that in respect of these amounts the service is provided by Air Cell Ltd and service tax also is paid by them and there cannot be any additional liability.He fairly submits that there is reciprocal arrangement for SIM cards and recharge coupons of appellants sold by Air Cell Ltd. and the amounts to be paid by one company to another is netted against reverse payments due. But this factor is not going to result in any s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision has been confirmed by the Ld. AR for Revenue also. Therefore, the counsel for appellant relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Jayaswals Neco Ltd. Vs CCE Nagpur - 2006 (195) ELT 142 (SC) and requests that the matter may be decided following the principles adopted by the adjudication order issued by the Service Tax Commissionerate vide order dt. 30.11.2011. 8. Ld. AR for Revenue reiterates the findings of the adjudicating authority and argues that services provided by BSNL cannot be an input service to the appellant. In respect of the 2nd 3rd issues, he has no objection if the matter is remanded to the Service Tax Commissionerate, Chennai who is the respondent and the jurisdictional Commissionerate, though the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jayaswals Neco Ltd. (supra). 11. As regards the 4 th issue, the appellant has not contested the issue and we uphold the order-in-original in respect of this issue Thus the Appeal No.ST/304/2011 gets disposed of. Appeal No.ST/313/2011 12. This appeal is filed by Aircel Ltd., Coimbatore who is operating as a mobile telecom service provider in the region of Tamil Nadu outside Chennai having tie up with Aircell Cellular Ltd. for interconnecting facility for connecting telephones located in Tamil Nadu and Chennai circle. 13. In this appeal, two issues are involved as under:- Demand of Service Tax are under reverse charge on import of services. S.No. Issue Amount Demanded Period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her this section will apply to a demand under section 66 of Finance Act, 1994 needs to be examined by the adjudicating authority. The counsel prays that the entire matter maybe remanded to the adjudicating authority for decision considering the Order-in-Original No.68/2011 dt.30.11.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai and accepted by the reviewing authority and having regard to the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in Jayaswals Neco Ltd. (supra) and also having regard to Section 96(J) of Finance Act, 1994. Having heard both sides, we find it proper to set aside the impugned order and remand the entire matter in this appeal to the adjudicating authority for de novo decision and decide both the issues in accordance with law. S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
