9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ashisth, CGSC, for the Appellant. Shri V.K. Kohli, Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri T. Pande, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per Prafulla C. Pant, J. (Oral)]. - This appeal, preferred under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, is directed against the order dated 11-7-2005, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as CESTAT), whereby the Appeal No. ST/134/04-NB(SM) filed by the assessee (present respondent) was allowed, and order of the revisional authority was set aside. 2. The question of law involved in this appeal is as under: Whether, service tax is not leviable on the service in respect of which draft project report by the scientific and technical exper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee to pay service tax in respect of the other items except the item relating to laboratory study of VGO (work mentioned above). Aggrieved by said order, a revision was filed by the Revenue before the Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut, which was registered as Revision No. 08/ST/2004 and disposed of vide order dated 12-7-2004, whereby the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise was reversed in respect of the work of laboratory study of VGO and service tax is charged @ 5% (i.e. Rs. 11,000/- only). On this, the respondent assessee went in appeal before the CESTAT and said authority vide its impugned order dated 11-7-2005, passed in Appeal No. ST/134/04-SM, allowed the appeal and restored the order of the Deputy Commissioner o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... letter of intent was issued by NRL to IIP (respondent assessee) much before the 'Scientific and Technical Consultancy' was brought under the net of service tax. Not only this the payment of Rs. 1.03 lakhs was paid by the customer to the respondent assessee much before the aforesaid date 16-7-2001 i.e. the date of bringing the service under the net of the service tax. No doubt, final project report may have been submitted by the respondent assessee after 16-7-2001, but that by itself does not make the assessee liable to pay the service tax in respect of the service provided prior to 16-7-2001. Also, it is to be kept in mind that nature of service tax is that of an indirect tax, and if the respondent assessee is made to pay service tax in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
