9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4.3.2008 certified on 8.4.2008 in Appeal No. ST/10/2006) Shri Ravi Raghwan, Adv. for Appellant S/Shri R.K. Chowdhury B.N. Pal, Advs. for Respondent [Order per D. N. Panda Member (Technical)] - The Appellant challenged the impugned order which held transportation of crude oil through pipeline made by the Appellant for ONGC relating to the period January, 2000 to March, 2005 was clearing and forwarding services rendered to the service taker and similarly service rendered by the Appellant through pipeline transportation of crude oil to Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. (BRPL) was "Business Auxiliary Services" rendered by the Appellant relating to the period September, 2004 to March, 2005. The impugned order dated 30th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s transported by Appellant through pipe line terminal from Barauni to its refinery at Dhaligaon and such service rendered by Appellant to BRPL was in input service classifiable under the category of "Business Auxiliary Services". Hence the demand arose by the impugned order. 2.1 Ld. Counsel, Shri Ravi Raghwan, appearing for the Appellant submitted that there is no dispute about providing services by Appellant to ONGC and BRPL through pipeline. But what that brings a difference is the nature of service which does not subscribe to view of ld. Adjudicating Authority for assessing the Appellant under the category of "Clearing and Forwarding Agency and as "Business Auxiliary Services" to ONGC and BRPL respectively when there was no law to ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mitted that similar such services cannot be taxed on the ground that different charges were realised under different heading when entire consideration received, related to transportation of crude oil through pipeline only. Service rendered to BRPL cannot be Business Auxiliary Service for a clear intention of Legislature conveyed by Board's Circular above. None of the ingredients of Section 65 (19) of Finance Act, 1994 defining the terms of "Business Auxiliary Service" attracted service rendered by Appellant to be taxable by the impugned order. He also submitted that the order of adjudication is also time barred. In support of his contentions, he relied on the following decisions (i) Glaxo Smithkline Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2005 (71) RLT 737 (C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvited proceeding that was well within limitation. He relied on the Tribunal's decision in the case of India Japan Lighting Pvt; Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Chennai - 2007 (218) ELT 103 (Tri.-Chennai). 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. 5. It is settled principle of law that there is no intendment nor equity about tax. Every subject is taxed by specific letters of law. From 16.6.05 incorporating sub-clause (zzz) to Section 65 (105) of Finance Act, 1994, transport through pipeline was brought to ambit of tax. Transport of crude oil through pipeline having been brought to tax specifically w.e.f. 16.6.05, taxation thereof prior to enactment of law is inconceivable. In view of our observations and view conveyed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
