9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hra, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per: V. Padmanabhan: 1. These two appeals are cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue and is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 236/2015 dated 02/07/2015. 2. The facts of the case are briefly that the assessee, during the period of dispute i.e. (11.02.2011 to 30.06.2012) has carried out the activity of modification and ornamentation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f of the client'. Accordingly, after issue of show cause notice, the Original Adjudicating Authority vide his order dated 31/12/2014, ordered payment of Service tax amounting to Rs. 37,94,368/-. The order also included payment of interest as well as penalties under various Sections of the Finance Act, 1994. When the issue was carried before the Commissioner (Appeals), he passed the impugned order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the activities carried out, cannot be considered to fall under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Service'. It is argued that the assessee has carried out the activity of modification of vehicle and installation of items such as air conditioners, carpets etc. Since there are no three parties involved in the activity, the levy of Service Tax under BAS is not justified. It is further argued that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... supply of goods and has also offered the full consideration for payment of VAT. 8. It is the argument of the assessee that the activity is not covered within the definition of BAS- as 'production or processing of goods for on behalf of the clients'. We note that in the facts of the present case, there are only two parties- the appellant as well as their customer. The customer has handed over the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
