9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness Auxiliary Service' (BAS). Revenue assumed that during 2007-08 and 2008-09 the ACP cladding and coil cutting services provided by the petitioner amounted to BAS. A show cause dated 18.11.2010 was issued alleging that during the course of Audit of the appellant records, it was seen that the appellant had provided ACP cladding and coil cutting for which charges were received; that these services are taxable under BAS defined in Section 65(19) read with Section 65 (105)(zzb) of the Finance Act, 1994 (the Act); that the appellant received Rs. 15,677,094/- for providing these services and consequently service tax of Rs.1,93,693/- besides interest and penalties thereon must be remitted. 3. In response, the appellant submitted inter alia that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that the petitioner had provided BAS; that services provided in relation to road works under BAS are not excluded from the liability to tax and therefore the adjudication order suffers from no error, warranting interference. 6. We notice from the show cause notice dated 18.11.2010 that apart from the over broad attribution that the appellant had provided a service in respect of ACP cladding which amounts to job work, falling within the definition 'Business Auxiliary Service' in Section 65(19) of the Act, there is no specific assertion, either in the show cause notice or in adjudication order as to exact nature of the service provided by the appellant towards ACP cladding. According to the ld. Counsel for the appellant as part of ACP cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asserts that the service falls generically within another taxable service (CICS), it becomes the non-derogable obligation of the adjudicating authority to deal with the dispute as to classification and he must record a finding that the service provided falls within a specified taxable service; and for reasons recorded for such conclusion. This is a fundamental obligation of the authority, having regard to the fact that there is facially an overlapping between several taxable services enumerated in Section 65 of the Act. This is the guidance mandated by Section 65A of the Act. 8. The order of the adjudicating authority dated 30.12.2011 clearly fails to deliver upon this obligation, of resolution of a dispute as to classification. Even the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
