9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 373X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce provided by the appellant is a taxable service is on the Revenue and this basic obligation has not been fulfilled in this case. The demands have been confirmed on the ground that in three sample cases, the treatment has been taken by the clients for few hours The department had enough opportunity and enough powers to gather necessary evidence to show that the claim of the appellant that the service provided by them is part of treatment was wrong. No such action has been taken by the department. Taking note of the learned counsel’s vehement assertion that in case the Revenue is able to show even in one case that the treatment was provided to tourists as part of the tourism, the appellant is ready to pay the entire service tax, we find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al and obtained license for running hospital in 1996 and the subject activities for which service tax has been demanded even though covered under the definition of Health Fitness Centre in view of the fact that the appellant is a hospital and the activities/services provided by the appellant are treatment of patience and such service has been rendered under the medical supervision. He also draws our attention to the Circular issued by the Board with regard to the service at the time of introduction wherein it has been stated that - Therapeutic massage basically means a massage provided by qualified professionals under medical supervision for curing diseases such as arthritis, chronic low back pain and sciatica etc. Ayurvedic massage ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duce the case history of the patients before the Respondent, which he has not availed. The sample three case history sheets produced by the appellant cannot be considered as a proof to come to the conclusion that the entire service rendered by the appellant was therapeutic in nature. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has taken a stand that the appellant has to show proof that the service provided by them was therapeutic treatment and the department presumed that such service was not provided as part of treatment and hence confirmed the demand. It may not be a right approach. This is not a case where the assessee is claiming the benefit of exemption notification. This is a case where the Revenue has considered that the service prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
