Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Gujarat Nri Coke Ltd vs C.C.E. & S.T. Rajkot on 4 January, 2018
In The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad Appeal No.E/12077/2016-SM [Arising out of OIA No. RAJ-EXCUS-000-APP-044 to 045-16-17 dated 29.08.2016 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Rajkot] Appeal No.ST/11993/2016-SM [Arising out of OIA No. RAJ-EXCUS-000-APP-044 to 045-16-17 dated 29.08.2016 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Rajkot] M/s Gujarat Nri Coke Ltd. Appellant Vs C.C.E. & S.T. Rajkot Respondent
Represented by:
For Appellant: None For Respondent: Shri. J. Nagori (A.R.) CORAM:
HONBLE M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Date of Hearing/Decision:04.01.2018 Final Order No. A/ 10027-10028 /2018 Per: M.V. Ravindran These two appeals are directed against order-in-appeal No. RAJ-EXCUS-000-APP-044 to 045-16-17 dated 29.08.2016.
2. None appeared on behalf of the appellant despite notice. The appellant has sent fax seeking adjournment without giving any reason. Since, there are no reasons given, the adjournment request is rejected and the appeals are taken up for disposal.
3. Heard Ld. DR and perused the records.
4. Both the appeals are related to each other, accordingly they are disposed of by a common order. From the perusal of records, it transpires that the issue is regarding the dispute as to discharge of service tax liability by the appellant as a recipient of the service. The First Appellate Authority in Paragraph No. 7 in Order-in-Original dated 24.08.2016 has recorded that the appellant has paid service tax on GTA, renting a cab, works contract, manpower recruitment supply agency service under reverse charge mechanism as a recipient of the taxable service. He has referred to the Provisions of Notification No. 30/2012 for the purpose. On perusal of the Show Cause Notice, I do not find any allegation on this issue that the appellant is required to pay as a recipient of service on all these services received by them. Nothing is on record to show that the Provisions of Notification 30/2012 has been properly addressed by the lower authorities. In my view, the eligibility to pay service tax on reverse charge mechanism under Notification 30/2012 needs to be examined in detail by Adjudicating Authority. Accordingly, without giving any opinion on the merits of the case, keeping all the issues open, the impugned order is set aside and the matters are remanded back to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the issues afresh. The Adjudicating authority will follow the principles of natural justice before coming to conclusion.
4. The appeals are disposed of by way of remand to the adjudicating authority.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open court) (M.V. Ravindran) Member (Judicial) Neha 2 | Page E/12077/2016-SM ST/11993/2016-SM