9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 925X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PACL New Delhi and receiving payment from that office, a finding was given that payment was received by the appellant directly from PACL, Nayanangal. No evidence to come to a finding other than what is alleged in the SCN is recorded in the adjudication order. In fact, if there is any finding, records relied upon should have been specified. Instead, Revenue has adopted a strategy of making allegation that the appellant have received payment directly from PACL, Nayanangal and then asking the appellant to prove that they have not received any such payment. I am of the view that such approach of asking the appellant to prove the absence of a fact is not in conformity with any judicial principle. If an allegation by Revenue was good enough t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thority gave a finding that appellant had provided only insurance services to PACL, Nayanangal and not insurance auxiliary service. This fact is recorded in para-8 of the adjudication order. There is a demand of service tax amount of Rs. 55142/- along with interest and penalty which is being disputed in the present proceeding. 2. The defense of the appellant has been that they had issued insurance policies to cover the employees of PACL. The policy was issued to New Delhi office of PACL and they have received payment from the New Delhi office of PACL and they have also remitted service tax that was to be paid for such services. They categorically stated that they did not receive any payment from PACL, Nayanangal. PACL Delhi was at liberty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... including those at Nayanangal. Certificate, to the above effect, from PACL, duly confirmed by the relevant Service Tax authorities will be produced in two weeks time. The appellant has filed a reply dated 14.8.12 [received on 17.8.12] and the same is taken on record. 5. It is seen from the impugned order that SCN was issued alleging non-payment service tax on the payments received from PACL, Nayanangal, whereas the appellants claim is that they have not received any payment from PACL Nayanangal. The appellant contends that insofar as service receiver PACL is concerned, payment is made for all the group insurance policies issued to employees of various branches of PACL situated all over India by PACL, Head office, New Delhi. Thus for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yanangal. During the adjudication stage, after the appellant has given submission that they were issuing policies to PACL New Delhi and receiving payment from that office, a finding was given that payment was received by the appellant directly from PACL, Nayanangal. No evidence to come to a finding other than what is alleged in the SCN is recorded in the adjudication order. In fact, if there is any finding, records relied upon should have been specified. Instead, Revenue has adopted a strategy of making allegation that the appellant have received payment directly from PACL, Nayanangal and then asking the appellant to prove that they have not received any such payment. I am of the view that such approach of asking the appellant to prove the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
