Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Nagpur Versus Malu Electrodes Pvt. Ltd.
Service Tax
2018 (6) TMI 330 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 20-3-2018
ST/87990/2017 – A/86110/2018
Service Tax
Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial)
Shri D. Shinde, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for appellant
None for respondent
ORDER
This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No: NGPÆXCUS/000/APPL/212/17-18 dated 09/08/2017passed by the Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Appeals), Nagpur.
2. None appeared on behalf of respondent despite notice. On perusal of the records it transpires that the issue lies in a very narrow compass. Accordingly, the appeal is taken up for disposal even in the absence of any
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ned on them along with interest and penalty.
5. On careful consideration of the submissions made, I find that the first appellate authority in the impugned order has in paragraph 28 and 30 categorically recorded the finding which is reproduced.
“28. Whereas, the appellant has submitted that the Man Power Supply Agencies had paid service tax on 100% of the gross amount charged and hence the entire amount of service tax leviable was paid to the credit of the Central Government. The Appellant had reimbursed them the total amount of gross amount charged for the service + the amount of service tax paid by them. As such recovery of service tax again from the Appellant would amount to double taxation, which is not considered by the lower a
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
as well as their vendors to take note of the same and understand this new form of levy. Therefore the instant demand of Service tax as per Annexure-A of the instant SCN appears to be not sustainable. Since the basic demand does not sustain there shall be no question of interest and penalty under Section 78 ibid. However, it is observed that in the entire chain of events, there is a definite violation of legal provisions in this regard during the said period. Accordingly penalty imposed by the lower authority under Section 77 ibid is being kept intact.”
6. Thus, the above said factual findings of the first appellate authority that the service providers have discharged the entire service tax due for the services provided is not contro
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =