9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (7) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Raipur. The respondent paid the amount of service tax payable on such consultancy services received by them in April, 2004. Subsequently when the received communication from the consulting engineer that they have office in India, the respondent filed the refund claim with the authorities relying upon Rule 2 (1) (d) (iv) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. The said refund claim was rejected by the adjudicating authority. On an appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the refund claim, hence revenue's appeal. 3. The learned DR submits that the refund claim is not liable to be sanctioned because the department has in their possession letter written by the - Chennai office of foreign consultant indicating that they have not provided any services to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d; (c) "Form" means a Form appended to these rules; (cc) "Half year" means the period between 1st April to 30th September or 1st October to 31st March of a financial year;] (d) "Person liable for paying service tax" means, (i) In relation to [a telephone connection or pager or a communication through telegraph or telex or a facsimile communication or a leased circuit]- (v) substituted regarding who will pay service tax on Transport Agency under Notification No.35/04-ST dated 03.12.04 (applicable w.e.f. 01.01.05) (a) the Director General of Posts and Telegraphs, referred to in clause (6) of Section 3 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885); or (b) the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., Delhi, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ves the taxable services, if the foreign service provider does not have any office in India. From the correspondence produce before me, it is very clear that the foreign service provider had an office in India situated at Chennai. The department was in correspondence with such office in Chennai from September, 2004. It is a situation, the department having received the service tax payment from the respondent, rightly or wrongly, hence did not issue any show cause notice to the service provider for liability to pay service tax. To my mind, Commissioner (Appeal) has correctly appreciated the provisions of Rule 2 (1) (d) (iv) and the revenue has failed to explain the reasons for not issuing show cause notice to service provider, having faile ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
