9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 223X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of legal provision prior to the insertion of section 66A of Finance Act, 1994, there could not be any taxability on discharge remittance, we cannot agree with him that the adjudication order has discharged its obligation to discuss the allegations in the show cause notice for rendering a finding thereon - It was incumbent upon the adjudicating authority to examine various evidences, including payments and agreements entered upon to come to the conclusion of taxability or otherwise. The matter remanded back to the original authority for a fresh decision after consideration of the facts and evidence on records - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Service Tax (EH) Application No: 85462 of 2019, 85261 of 2019, Service Tax Appeal No: 8888 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issioner of Service Tax (Adjudication), Mumbai vide order dated 21st March 2013. 3. We find that the issue has been pending for a long time and that the appellant has not been making appearance either in person or through representative. Accordingly, the two appeals of M/s Kingfisher Airlines Limited are dismissed in default without examining the merit of the submission. 4. In a separate proceedings, for the period from 1st October 2005 to 31st March 2006, the payments made by M/s Kingfisher Airlines Limited to M/s Zion Far East Investment Ltd, Mauritius under agreement dated 18th April 2005 for facilitating lease of seven aircraft was held to be liable to tax under section 65(105)(zzb) as recipient of business auxiliary service def ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cause notice. He admitted that the taxability prior to 18th April 2006 in relation to all the services was not enforceable. It is his contention that the receipt of commercial training and coaching service , management or business consultant s service and management, maintenance or repair service for the period from 18th April 2006 to 31st March 2008 should have been evaluated on merits and disposed off on merits by the adjudicating authority. 6. None appeared for the respondent, M/s Kingfisher Airlines Limited. 7. We have gone through the impugned order and find that very elaborate discussions have been made with reference to many authoritative texts. However, we find that there is no concrete finding on any of the allegations o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
