2017 (3) TMI 1157

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d of having a taxable nature - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
Mr. (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President and Mr. Ashok K. Arya, Member (Technical) Shri Ranjan Khanna, D.R. - for the appellant None - for the respondent ORDER The present appeal is filed by the department against the Order in Appeal No. 03/ST/2013 dated 8.1.2013. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent during the period under consideration were engaged in providing the services to various parties including M/s Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. The respondents were holding the registration on service tax under the category of "rent-a-cab scheme, operator service, and erection, commissioning or installation services". The department was of the view that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s case. Further, I find from the records as well as from the discussion of the adjudicating authority that the appellant had obtained Service Tax Registration on 28.5.2004 under the category of 'rent-a-cab' and 'erection, commissioning or installation' service and have filed ST-3 returns for the period from April, 2006 to March 2010 along with tax paid challans for these two services only. It is worth noting here that on the date of registration, the services of 'site formation and clearance, excavation, earthmoving and demolition' had also not been brought under Tax net and thus the appellant's having obtained the registration under 'Erection and Commissioning' along with 'Rent-a-Cab's Services' prudently appears to be proper. The appellan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... against them that the tax so paid did not pertain to their services with respect of M/s BSNL and M/s SECL could have merited cognizance subject to its having been proved from the records of the appellant that could have been accessed even from their registered premises. The department had not made any effort in that respect and have merely alleged that the tax already paid by them pertained to some other 'Erection and Commissioning services' and the adjudicating authority have also failed to observe that allegations remain assertions without proof, until they are proved. In the backdrop of the above, I do not find any reason to accept the Department's stand that the appellant had not discharged their Service Tax liabilities as had been all .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X