9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u. Revenue proceeded against the appellant on the ground that they were rendering 'Consulting Engineer' service to M/s. GVK Industries. Therefore show cause notice was issued for demanding the service tax for the period from 7-7-97 to 31-3-97. Penal proceedings were also initiated. The Assistant Commissioner Central Excise passed the Order-in-Original confirming the demand of Service tax to the tune of Rs.26,60,700/-. He imposed a penalty of Rs.25,00,000/- on the appellants under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. Further he issued amended order by holding that the appellants were required to pay a penalty of Rs 200/- per day for everyday default instead of Rs.25,00,000/- subject to the condition that it does not exceed the amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 189. It was submitted that the facts of the present case are identical. Further the Rolls Royce Industries Power (I) Ltd. case was followed by the Chennai Bench of CESTAT in the case of CMS (I) Operations & Maintenance Co. P. Ltd. v. CCE, Pondicherry in its Final Order 614,615/07 dated 21-5-2007 [2007 (7) S.T.R. 369 (Tri.) = 2007-TIOL-892-CESTAT- MAD]. 5. The learned departmental representative reiterated the points to quote in the orders in appeal. 6. On a very careful consideration of the issue, we find that the definition of 'Consulting Engineer' in terms of Section 65(13) of the Finance Act, 1994 is as follows "Consulting Engineer "means any professionally qualified engineer or an engineering firm w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r (I) Ltd., decision is not applicable to the present case. It is also further seen that the Commissioner (Appeals) has actually remanded the matter to the Original Authority to find out the value of the services in the entire contract relating to consultancy and to recompute the duty liability. We find that this cannot be done because a contract cannot be vivisected in terms of the Tribunal's decision in the Daelim case [2006 (3) S.T.R. 124 (Tribunal) = 2003 (155) E.L.T. 457 (Tribunal)] to levy service tax on a portion of the contract. Further the ratio of the Daelim case has been followed in the case of CMS (I) Operations & Maintenance Co. P. Ltd. which was (cited supra) by the Chennai Bench. Since the issue is squarely covered we do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
