9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 447X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quidator For Brimco Plastic Machinery P. Ltd. [2015 (10) TMI 2281 - SUPREME COURT], the appellant is not liable to par Central excise duty again. - Decided in favour of appellant with consequential relief - E/1996/2007-EX(DB) - FINAL ORDER NO-70517/2016 - Dated:- 10-6-2016 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri J.P. Kaushik, Advocate for Appellant Shri Rajeev Ranjan, Joint Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER This appeal is filed by M/s T.T.L. Ltd. against the Order-in-Original No. 18/Comm./GZB/2007 dated 29/03/2007. 2. The issue in this appeal is whether the appellants, who have cleared their products and also rendered the commissioning and installation se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Central Excise Duty is leviable under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 whereas the Service Tax is levied and collected under the provisions of Section 65(95) of the Finance Act, 1994. Section 65(95) of the Finance Act, 1994, states that Service tax means Tax leviable under provisions of chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. Both the Legislative provisions are entirely independent having no bearing on each other. It is further observed that there is no provision in either of the Acts or Rules therein that if, in any certain case, Central Excise Duty is leviable then no Service Tax is chargeable or vice-versa. 4. Being aggrieved through the order of the Ld. Commissioner, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 5. The learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed counsel also relies on the decision of the Division Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. 2007 (7) STR 225(Tri-Chennai) wherein this Tribunal held that when the Service Tax is paid on an activity, such activity cannot be chargeable to Excise Duty or Sales Tax. Accordingly, the appeal be allowed with consequential benefits. 7. The learned AR for the Revenue relies on the impugned order. 8. We have considered the rival contentions. We hold that for the installation activity, there is separate contract between the parties the appellant had received the installation and commissioning charges on which Service Tax has been paid by the appellant and accepted by Revenue. Accordingly, respectfully following the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
