9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A.R.) ORDER Per Dr. D. M. Misra : This is an application for waiver of predeposit of service tax of Rs. 56.62 lakhs and equal amount of penalty imposed under Section 78, penalty of Rs. 5,000/- imposed under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. At the outset, the ld. Advocate appearing for the Applicant, submits that during the relevant period, the Applicants have entered into an agreement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervice provider. It is his submission that even though the initial demand was issued for the whole period ranging from June to October, 2007. However, the ld. Commissioner has confirmed the demand only relating to the payment received in June, 2007 i.e. Rs. 56.63 lakhs. He submits that the services rendered prior to 31.5.2007, have been erroneously held by the ld.Commissioner as services under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e service tax. We find that the service tax has been confirmed on the ground that the Applicant had received the services under the category of 'Management, Maintenance or Repair Services'. The scope of service as mentioned in Annexure II to the Agreement, is as follows : The prospective contractor for dril ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... c. as required for successful completion of the job. Prima-facie, we find that the ld. Commissioner in the impugned order has observed that the said services are nothing, but maintenance of existing wells and also exploring the possibility of new wells. In contrast, the ld. Advocate submits that the Applicant neither maintained nor repaired the existing wells, but plugged the existing wells and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
