2011 (1) TMI 233

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re that the department initiated proceedings against the appellant on the premise that the appellant was providing 'Repairs and Maintenance service' of xerographic equipment and systems, toners and printers and facsimile to various clients without obtaining any service tax registration nor paying any service tax on the amount received as remuneration from M/s. Xerox Modicorp Limited for providing the above service. The lower adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 2,47,324/- along with interest and imposed penalties under Sections 75A, 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 and also appropriated an amount of Rs. 25,000/- paid by the appellant during investigation. The appellant challenged the adjudication order before the Commiss....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o them." The learned JDR further points out to para 2.1 of the service agreement which reads as under : "2.1 XMC hereby appoints SA and the SA hereby accepts the appointment as one of the Service Agency for providing specific service as authorised by XMC from time to time. The appointment is on non-exclusive basis. This agreement will not be construed as an agreement between 'Principal and Principal' ". 5. The learned JDR submits that the lower adjudicating authority has rightly held that their service agency agreement was for providing specific service to XMC customers and not as a sub-contractor. On a query raised by this bench regarding Commissioner (Appeals) order holding that the appellant to be a sub-contractor in p....