Commissioner's decision upheld, separate action taken for service tax, appeal rejected.

The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to drop proceedings initiated in a show cause notice against the Respondent in Kolkata, as separate action had been taken in Visakhapatnam for non-payment of service tax. The Commissioner correctly concluded that no further action was required in Kolkata, leading to the rejection of the Department's appeal.

---

---

Issues involved:
The Department's appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner dropping proceedings initiated in a show cause notice.

Summary:
The Department challenged the order passed by the Commissioner dropping proceedings initiated in a show cause notice. The Department argued that the Adjudicating authority failed to verify if the Respondent's units in Visakhapatnam and Kolkata were the same or different, and if the services rendered at both locations were similar. The Respondent, through their Advocate, clarified that their Head office is in Kolkata, with a branch office in Visakhapatnam for on-site work. They provided a letter stating the specific activities undertaken at the Visakhapatnam branch office, emphasizing that the services rendered there do not attract service tax. The Respondent presented documents showing that separate action had been initiated against them in Visakhapatnam for non-payment of service tax, which had been finalized by the Tribunal. The Commissioner rightly observed that no further action was needed in Kolkata as action had already been taken in Visakhapatnam. Consequently, the Commissioner dropped the proceedings against the Respondent in Kolkata. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, rejecting the Department's appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found that no further action was necessary at the Respondent's Head Office in Kolkata and upheld the Commissioner's decision to drop the proceedings. The appeal filed by the Department was rejected.

---