TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 1039
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C (AR) ORDER Per: Mathew John: 1. The applicant provides mobile telephone services. They had agreement with other such service providers (hereinafter referred to as "partners") for providing roaming services to subscribers of the applicant when the subscribers go out to a territory where the applicant was not providing mobile telephone services through their own infrastructure. There was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y them to other mobile telephone operators for roaming facilities provided to the subscribers of such other operators. Based on such reasoning, demand was issued for service tax short paid during the period April 07 to March 08 and on adjudication, an amount of Rs.49,54,664/- is confirmed along with interest and penalties. Aggrieved by the other, the applicant has filed appeal along with stay peti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of tax paid by their partners on services received by the applicant. He submits that the applicant had made a clear declaration that they had not taken Cenvat credit on the service tax paid by the partners. So even if they were to include the value of services provided by the partners on the gross value of services provides by the applicant, the applicant would have become eligible for taking Cen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as is recorded by the Commissioner in para 4.8 of the impugned order. 5. We have considered the submissions on both sides. Prima facie, there is infraction of law laid down. However, it is prima facie clear that the services received by the applicant from other service providers to extend roaming facility to applicant's subscribers is an input service for the applicant. Thus the advocate fo....