9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 855X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Kumar Iyer, Superintendent (A.R.) for the Respondent ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran These two appeals are directed against Order-in-Appeal Nos. P-I/MMD/141/2012 dated 27.07.2012 & PUN-EXCUS-001-APP-37-14-15 dated 04.06.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-I, wherein the first appellate authority has upheld the orders and confirmed the demand of Service Tax, interest th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce, that in identical issue, in the case of Wonder Cars Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I [2016 (42) STR 1055 (Tri.-Mumbai)] Tribunal Bench held as under. "This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. PI/RKS/73/2012, dated 21-3-2012. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this appeal is regarding the service tax liability on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Services and covered directly in relation to their main business of sales of cars. 5. We find that the findings recorded by the lower authorities are incorrect as the definition of Business Support Services as per Section 65(104c) of the Finance Act reads as under: "support services of business and commerce means services provided in relation to business or commerce and includes evaluation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... covers services which are rendered as indicated therein. In the case in hand, the amount collected as extra charges is not for any of the services which are enumerated in the said definition. The first appellate authority has stated that appellant is a rendering customer relationship services which in our view is incorrect as the definition talks about an entity rendering customer relationship ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
