9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o question of interest payable by them. The impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.' There are no hesitation in setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal - appeal allowed. - Hon ble Shri P. Dinesha , Member ( Judicial ) And Hon ble Shri M. Ajit Kumar , Member ( Technical ) Shri H. S. Manoharan , Consultant for the Appellant Shri Anoop Singh , JC ( AR ) for the Respondent ORDER Per M. Ajit Kumar , This appeal is filed against Order in Appeal No. 115/2014 dated 11.9.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Trichy. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are registered with the Service Tax Department for providing Technical Inspection and Certification Service and w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed consultant appeared for the appellant and Shri Anoop Singh, learned authorized representative appeared for the respondent. 4. The learned consultant for the appellant submitted that they are part of the Directorate General of Quality Assurance (DGQA), Ministry of Defence, Government of India, entrusted with the responsibility of providing quality assurance of armament stores in respect of armaments meant for Army, Navy and Air Force. The dispute in the present case relates to the alleged service tax liability of the appellant in respect of consideration received under the heading technical inspection and certification agency service as defined under section 65(109) of the Finance Act 1994. The learned consultant submitted that the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the Service Tax liability of such charges has been examined, in detail by the Hon'ble J K High Court, in the abovementioned case. The Hon'ble High Court observed that the appellants are not liable to Service Tax on the testing fee paid to them by the licensed manufacturers of Guns. The relevant portion of the judgement is reproduced below:- On facts the 5th respondent is a Government of India establishment assigned with the job of proof tasting of fire arms. The proof testing is required as per the statute to manufacture of fire arms for public safety. Under Rule 22 of the Arms Rule, 1962 testing fee alone is collected. The said clarification issued by the Revenue will bind the subordinate assessing authorities and one cannot exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndertaken as mandatory and statutory functions. These age not to be treated as services provided for a consideration. As it involves the safety of the public and it is bounden duty of the State to protect its citizens. Therefore, such activities assigned to and performed by a sovereign/ public authority under the provisions of any law, do not constitute taxable services. Any amount/fee collected in such cases is not to be treated as consideration or the purpose of levy of service lax. 11. From the above order of CESTAT, affirmed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court, and Circular No.96 issued by Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Tax Resource Unit, New Delhi in Circular No.96/7/2007-ST dated 23.08.2007 as well as th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
