2008 (12) TMI 92

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... afide belief on non-liability – so demand is time barred
Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) and Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T) Shri Sarju Mehta, C.A., for the Appellant. Shri R.S. Srova, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - The service tax of Rs. 1,11,800/- stand confirmed against the appellant along with imposition of penalty on the ground that during the period 16-10-98 to December 2001, they have provided the technical management services to their client without payment of tax. On the other hand, it is the appellant's contention that the services so provided by them fall under the category of "Scientific and Technical Consultancy Services", which were introduced w.e.f. 16-7-01 and as such, the demand con .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of First Schedule to CETA, 1985. The services so provided by them through their technically qualified Director, Vice-President (Operation) and other competent personnel are basically for technical development and upgradation of the customers' equipments etc. The lower authority have observed that the debit note raised by the appellant to their client for collection of service charges contained the following description of the services: - Technical and Management Service, - Various Technical and Administrative Service, - Technical Services, provided by the Engineers of the Appellant, in connection with machinery and other equipment, - Legal and Professional Charges. 4. On the above basis, it stands concluded that since the services pro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... be liable to pay duty under the category of management consultant service. 7. As we have already discussed kind of services being provided by the appellant, falls under the category of management consultant and not under the scientific or technical consultancy. 8. However, we find force in the appellant's contention that the demand of tax for the period 16-10-98 to December 2001 having been raised on 7-11-02, was barred by limitation for the major period. The income received from such services was being collected by raising invoices and the same was also being reflected in the annual balance-sheets being prepared by the appellant. As such, it cannot be held that there was any suppression or any mis-statement on the part of the appellant, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X