Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Kansara Modler Ltd. & Others vs Cce, Jaipur on 21 June, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL West Block No. 2, R.K. Puram, New Delhi 110 066. Date of Hearing : 21/06/2013 ST/188-189/2011 [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 465-471/(CB)/ST/JPR-II/2010 dated 22.11.2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Jaipur] For Approval & Signature : Honble Mr. Sahab Singh, Member (Technical) 1. Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 2. Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? Yes 3. Whether their Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order? Seen 4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities? Yes M/s Kansara Modler Ltd. & others Appellant Vs. CCE, Jaipur Respondent
Appearance:
Ms. Rashi, Advocate - for the Appellant
Shri M.S. Negi, AR - for the Respondent
Coram : Honble Mr. Sahab Singh, Member (Technical)
Final Order No. 56783-56784/2013
Per Sahab Singh :
These are two appeals filed by M/s Kansara Modler Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as appellants) against the Order in appeal No. 465-471/(CB)/ST/JPR-II/2010 dated 22.11.2010.
2. Brief facts of the case are that appellants have received Business Auxiliary Services and Consulting Engineering Services from the service provider who were located abroad and did not have any establishment in India. Therefore in terms of Notification No. 36/2004 dated 31.12.2004 read with Rule 2(1) (d) (iv) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 the appellants were liable to pay Service Tax as the service provider. The appellants have paid Service Tax through Cenvat Account but the Department was of the view that Service Tax should be paid in cash instead of Cenvat Account. Accordingly two Show Cause Notices were issued to the appellants for the period April 2007 to September 2007 and April 2008 to September 2008 demanding payment of service tax amounting to Rs. 82,224/- and 80,239/- in cash through PLA. These Show Cause Notices were adjudicated by the original authority against the appellants. Appellants challenged the Order in Original before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order have rejected their appeal and held that payment is to be made in cash through PLA. However, Commissioner (Appeal) has set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. The appellants have challenged impugned order in present appeal.
3. Heard both sides.
4. I find that issued involved in the present appeal already stand settled by the Tribunal in case of appellants themselves vide order No. 56000/2013 dated 03.04.2013 wherein it was held that the payment of service tax can be made through Cenvat Credit. Accordingly I find no merit in the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) and set aside the same and allow the appeals.
(Dictated & pronounced in open Court) (Sahab Singh) Member (Technical) Neha 3