2014 (6) TMI 556

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....horized Representative (DR) JUDGEMENT Per. Justice G. Raghuram :- The order dated 22/03/11 passed by the Superintendent, Central Excise, Range IV, Division I, New Delhi confirmed service tax demand of Rs. 81,079/- apart from penalty under Section 76 and interest under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal which was rejected by the Commissioner (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dition of the taxable service. Both the Authorities however, while noticing the claim of the noticee (of having provided the service prior to the date of increase of the rate of tax), observed that the appellant had not established by any factual data, this claim; and proceeded on the assumption that the relevant date for competing the appropriate rate of tax is the date of receipt of consideratio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve recorded that there was no material on record to support the appellants claim as to having provided the taxable service prior to increase in the rate of taxation; and since the learned Counsel of the appellant Shri Batra contends that there is sufficient and credible evidence to establish this claim, we consider it appropriate to remit the matter to the appellate Authority, to ascertain whethe....