Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Service Tax vs M/S. Intertoll Ics Ce Cons O& M P Ltd on 23 December, 2011
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH, COURT NO. III Service Tax COD Application No. 276 of 2011 Service Tax Stay Application No. 2464 of 2011 Service Tax Appeal No. 1167 of 2011 Commissioner of Service Tax Appellants Delhi Vs. M/s. Intertoll ICS CE Cons O& M P Ltd Respondent Appearance: Shri Rajindra Gupta, DR for the Appellants Shri Dheeraj Srivastava, Advocate for the Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. D.N.Panda, Member (Judicial) Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing/decision : 23.12.2011 ORAL ORDER NO . __________________
Per Mr. D.N.Panda (for the Bench):
Learned DR explains that there was delay of only 2 days which was beyond the control of Revenue for which MA(COD) application may be allowed. There is no objection from either side. Allowing MA(COD), the appeal is admitted.
2. Against the stay application, Revenues prayer is that authorities below have failed to consider activity of the respondents falling within the ambit of business auxiliary service.
3. Revenue is aggrieved for the reasoning given in para 3.4 of the impugned order holding that the respondents activities shall not come within the purview of the law.
4. Respondent supports the orders of the authority below.
5. Heard both sides and perused the records. Finding no substance in the argument of the Revenue, we proceed to dispense with the requirement of pre-deposit and reject the stay application.
6. On merits of the matter, we find that National Highway Authority of India has availed services of the respondents. Fundamentally, the said National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) is not established by Revenue to be business concern nor a commercial concern not being engaged in any business activity. Therefore providing business auxiliary services by respondents to such NHAI is inconceivable. Therefore, for such reason, we dismiss the appeal of the Revenue without approving reasons given by the adjudicating authority.
6. Consequently, MA(COD), Stay application, appeal are disposed of in the above manner.
(Pronounced in the open court)
( D.N.Panda ) Member(Judicial)
( Rakesh Kumar ) Member(Technical)
ss
2