9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wever, there is no further discussion, analysis or finding on this aspect. In our view, if the appellants are only engaged in providing General Insurance Service, the Show Cause Notice issued to them demanding tax under Insurance Auxiliary Services cannot sustain. This would be best ascertained by the adjudicating authority in de novo adjudication. Accordingly, for the limited purpose of ascertaining the fact that the appellants had indeed provided only General Insurance Service and not Insurance Auxiliary Service, the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority - Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No.: ST/54/2011 - Final Order No. 40391/2019 - Dated:- 26-2-2019 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It is not the case as mentioned by the Commissioner, that while finalizing such provisional assessment, the subject transactions were suppressed from the Department. The order of finalization of provisional assessment has not been taken up for review. On this ground, the impugned Order is not sustainable; (ii) The appellant had repeatedly taken a stand in the proceedings that the figures obtained from M/s. PACL did not represent the correct taxable value as it included even the value of claims settled and tax had been discharged by the appellant on the correct taxable value at Chennai, where they had taken centralized registration. The factual position on the taxable value has also been confirmed by M/s. PACL; (iii) At paragraph 8 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a finding that the taxpayer (appellant) had not substantiated their contention on the taxable value. But the issue being factual, on this point he should have given sufficient time to substantiate the appellant s claim. Principles of natural justice have not been followed in this regard, though the amount in question was part of provisional assessment, which was finalized by the Department at Chennai; (vi) The assessments during the period in question were provisional. Under Service Tax Rule 6(5) in case of provisional assessment, the appellant was required to file a statement in ST-3A, which the appellant had filed. Under Service Tax Rule 6(6), where a memorandum in ST-3A is filed, the Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hennai, which they had joined as a taxpayer client with effect from 24.01.2008. Second, that the Show Cause Notice s premises that the services provided by them were under Insurance Auxiliary Service whereas the appellants were providing only General Insurance Service . 8. The second contention regarding provision of services only under General Insurance Service has been contended by the appellant right from the reply to the Show Cause Notice and also in the personal hearing and has also been taken note of by the adjudicating authority in paragraph 7 of his Order. However, there is no further discussion, analysis or finding on this aspect. In our view, if the appellants are only engaged in providing General Insurance Service, the Show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
