9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 843X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tant Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per M V Ravindran This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. PIII/RS/338/2011 dated 30.11.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune III. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this case is regarding the demand of differential Service Tax liability on the appellant during the period October, 2005 to Ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TIOL-794-CESTAT-MUM and produced a copy of the said order of the Tribunal. 4. On consideration of the submissions made by both sides and perusal of the records, we find that the issue is whether the Service Tax liability needs to be discharged by the appellant as per the prevailing Service Tax rate during the entire period of hire purchase of contract. It is undisputed that the appellant is in le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to pay service tax @8% and 10.2% prevailing at the time of providing the service. 2. The appellant relied upon the decision of Tribunal in the case of Art Leasing Ltd. vs. CCE 2007 (8) STR 162 = 2007-TIOL-1493-CESTAT-BANG. The contention is that in case of hire purchase contract the Tribunal held that the rate of service tax will be rate prevailing at the time contract is entered into. Hence the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs. We agree with the appellants that the installment payments are only obligations of the hirer. The finding of the Commissioner(Appeals) that the appellant continues to provide service during the payment of installments is not correct. Therefore, the rate of Service Tax will be the rate prevailing on the date on which the contract is entered into. Consequently, the demand of differential amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
