9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 359X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndia Ltd. During the course of audit of the records of M/s Pandit Automotive Private Ltd., Pune (M/s Pandit in short), it was noticed that though M/s Pandit are Authorized Service Station for M/s Tata Motors, however, they were only paying Service Tax on the pay-off received from the Tata Motors on servicing done during the warranty period. After the warranty period is over, their purported sister concern, who is the appellant herein, does the servicing of vehicles and no Service Tax is paid on the services done by the appellant for servicing of such vehicles. Statements of the officers of M/s Pandit revealed that M/s Pandit are Authorized Dealer of Light Motor Vehicle (LMV) manufactured by M/s Tata Motors and M/s Fiat India Ltd. However, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and merely because they have put the logo of M/s Tata Motors on the job-card and using software system SIEBEL of M/s Tata Motors, they cannot be considered as "Authorized Service Station" as defined in law and the Revenue has not brought on record any evidence showing that they have been appointed as 'Authorized Service Station' of M/s Tata Motors Ltd. (ii) It is also submitted that the demand is barred by limitation of time and as early as in 2001, M/s Pandit had sought clarification and guidance from the department regarding the liability of the appellant to pay Service Tax and the department had clarified that the appellants are not liable to pay Service Tax as 'Authorized Service Station' of M/s Tata Motors Ltd. &n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... free servicing of vehicles during the warranty period and bills were also issued by the appellant only. (iii) The staff of the appellant firm were given training by M/s Tata Motors and the appellant firm has also been writing "Authorized Workshop of Tata Motors" on the job-cards and other stationeries. The appellant is using SIEBEL software of Tata Motors for generating the invoices which is given only to the authorized dealers for tracking and providing after sales service. (iv) Inquiry with M/s Tata Motors revealed that they were aware that the appellant was rendering after sales service and since they were providing satisfactory services to the customers, they have not objected to the same. The dealership is v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e computation of the Service Tax has been provided by the appellant only and, therefore, this point cannot be adduced at this point of time. Accordingly, he pleads that the appellant be put to terms. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. 5.1 The issue for consideration is whether the appellant can be considered as an 'Authorized Service Station' of M/s Tata Motors as per Section 65(9) of the Finance Act, 1994. "Authorized Service Station" means any service station, or centre, authorized by any motor vehicle manufacturer, to carry out any service, repair, reconditioning or restoration of any motor car, light motor vehicle or two wheeled motor vehicles manufactured by such manufacturer." In the present cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r tracking and providing after sales services to consumers. The letter also reveals that M/s Tata Motors were aware that their brand name has been used by the appellant on their job-cards and other stationery and it has never been objected to by M/s Tata Motors. We have also perused the job-card issued by the appellant which clearly reveals that the appellant has claimed themselves to be 'authorized workshop' of Tata Motors in the job-cards issued by them to the customers and also in the job-slips and the bills for the services undertaken by them. From these evidences available on record, it is clear that the appellant has been functioning as an 'Authorized Service Station' of M/s Tata Motors and, therefore, the services rendered by the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of facts raised against the appellant is prima facie sustainable. 5.3 As regards the errors in the computation of Service Tax, it is seen that these figures have been provided by Shri V.S.Gokhale, who is the Director of the appellant firm and also the Deputy Managing Director of M/s Pandit, as the income received from their various activities. From these details given, the taxable service has been arrived at in the show-cause notice. Neither in the reply to the show-cause notice nor before the adjudicating authority, the appellant had disputed the correctness of the figures. Even in the appeal memorandum, they are completely silent on this aspect. Only in the course of argument by the learned Counsel, this point has been raised for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
