2008 (1) TMI 228

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... al assistance to any person – assessee rightly pointed that as per Rule 6(1) STR, tax is payable on the gross amount received by the service provider – but dept. has no case that the impugned amount was received by the appellants - stay granted - S/160/2007 - 35/2008 - Dated:- 16-1-2008 - Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) [Order per] - This is an application filed by M/s. Hydro S S Industri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and another penalty of Rs. 2,000/- under Section 77 of the Act. In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) affirmed the order of the lower authority. 2. Moving the application, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellant is a manufacturing-firm and is not engaged in rendering any services. The appellant-firm is not an engineering firm and had not rendered any technical .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... neering". Therefore, the impugned activities did not constitute engineering consultancy warranting any demand. Moreover, the customer had not paid the said Rs. 6.00 lakhs and the appellant had written-off the said amount as un realizable. Service tax was payable only on the gross amount received towards service provided. Therefore the impugned demand deserves to be set aside. 3. The learned SD .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X