9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 725X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d against the appellant under the category of Business Auxiliary Service, therefore, the said demand is set aside. After 01.05.06 it is alleged in the show cause notice that the merit classification of the services in question is under the category of Business Support Service, whereas, the adjudicating authority held that said service do qualify under the Business Auxiliary Services which means the adjudicating authority has gone beyond the scope of the show cause notice, therefore, the adjudication order deserves no merits, hence the same is set aside. Penalty - HELD THAT:- The appellant has collected the service tax from their clients and during the impugned period the appellant has collected certain amount as service tax from the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x under the category of business auxiliary service with effect from 01.07.2003 and under the category of business support services with effect from 01.05.2006, it was also revealed from the records that the appellant is collecting the service tax from their clients on the services in question and not deposited in the same with the department. Neither the appellant is showing the same in ST-3 return nor they have paid service tax or the service tax in question being exempted, therefore, the show cause notice dated 23.10.2008 was issued to demand service tax under the category of practicing chartered accountant service, business auxiliary service and business support services for the period of 01.07.2003 to 31.03.2008. The matter was adjudica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith regard to demand of service tax under Business Auxiliary Service and the impugned order is also not sustainable as the adjudicating authority has gone beyond the allegation in the show cause notice demanding service tax under the business auxiliary service, whereas show cause notice demands under the business support service. 4. On the other hand, Ld. AR opposed the contention of the Ld. Counsel and submits that the service tax has been demanded from the appellants under both the categories i.e. Business Auxiliary Service and Business Support Service, therefore, the adjudicating authority has rightly classified their service under Business Auxiliary Service and demand of service tax is rightly confirmed. He further submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per the show cause notice after 01.05.2006 the liability of the appellant arises under the category of Business Support Service. The Ld. adjudicating authority in the impugned order has not correctly examined the decision of S.R. Kalyanakrishan (Supra) as in the case of S.R. Kalyanakrishan (Supra) wherein this Tribunal held that if a service has been classified in a particular service at a later stage, the said service is not liable to be taxed under any other category prior to that date. Admittedly in the show cause notice, it has been alleged that after 01.05.2006 the merit classification of the services rendered by the appellant do qualify under Business Support Service, therefore, for the period prior to 01.05.2006, demand of se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
