9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 709X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urnished by the appellant before the audit wing was also recorded in paragraph 6 of the impugned order. It is surprising that how the appellant s representative had made the statement, that they are liable to pay the service tax, inasmuch as in paragraph 6, the authorized signatory s statement was recorded, which is to the effect that he is not aware about the billing pattern and had acted as per the direction of the Corporate Office and accounting instructions and that they had accounted SDC charges separately in the invoices. Further, it is not the case of Revenue that the appellants had not entered into any written contracts with the overseas entities for provision of requisite services. The original authority has not examined the docume ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 78 ibid read with Section 174 ibid on the appellants. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants herein M/s Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd., are inter alia, engaged in the business of providing taxable services under the category of Management, Maintenance or Repair , defined under Section 65 (64) ibid read with Section 65 (105) (zzg) ibid. For providing such taxable service, the appellants got themselves registered with the jurisdictional Service Tax Department. During the disputed period i.e., 2012-13 to 2014-15, the appellant had reflected an amount of Rs.1,14,841.62 lakhs under the heads of account sales and service income in the Balance Sheets finalized by them on account of repair and overhauling of aircrafts. Upon verific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gn function . During the course of hearing of the appeal, the appellants have filed the written submission before the Bench, contending inter-alia, that towards provision of taxable service under the category of Management, Maintenance and Repair Service to the Indian Air Force, the appellants had duly discharged the service tax liability on the labour charges and consequent profit thereon; that the appellants are not exposed to the service tax liability as recipient of service in respect of the services received from the overseas entities for overhauling of the aircrafts belong to the Indian Air Force. The appellants have referred to the decisions of the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, rendered in the case of the appellants themselves, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xecution of the work, the Tribunal had held that no service tax demand can be fastened, of course on different category of services. However, in the present case, we find that the original authority has not examined the documentary evidences including the contracts, to conclude that the appellants had really received the taxable services and were liable for payment of service tax as recipient of service under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM). 6. Therefore, under the facts and in the circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the original authority should properly examine the material evidences for a conclusion regarding leviability of service tax on the appellants or otherwise, for provision of the taxable service under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
